Skip to main content

Full text of "Meeting minutes"

See other formats





San Francisco Public Library 

Government Information Center 
San Francisco Public Library 
100 Larkin Street, 5th Floor 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



REFERENCE BOOK 

Not to be taken from the Library 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/1meetingminutes2004sanf 




All Committees] 

^. , , ^ r o I? • government Document Section 

City and County of San Francisco^^ Ubrary 

^ Meeting Agenda 

Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Aaron Peskin, Gerardo Sandoval, Jake McGoldrick 

Clerk: Victor Young 

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:30 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 

Note: Each item on the Consent or Regular agenda may include the following documents: 

1) Legislation 

2) Budget Analyst report 

3) Legislative Analyst report 

4) Department or Agency cover letter and/or report 

5) Public correspondence 

These items will be available for review at City Hall, Room 244. Reception Desk. 

Each member of the public will be allotted the same maximum number of minutes to speak as set by 
the Chair at the beginning of each item, excluding City representatives, except that public speakers 
using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony 
time limit. If simultaneous translation services are used, speakers will be governed by the public 
testimony time limit applied to speakers not requesting translation assistance. 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
AGENDA CHANGES MAR - 5 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REGULAR AGENDA 

1. 031975 |Year 4 Renewal of SFPUC Program Management Services Contract| 

Resolution retroactively approving the Public Utilities Commission's approval of the fourth year 
renewal of Agreement No. CS-524, Program Management Services, with the Water Infrastructure 
Partners (WIP) to provide program management services for the SFPUC Capital Improvement 
Program, for an amount not to exceed $1 1 million; and approving the Contract Year 3 performance 
fee for an amount not to exceed $497,000. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

12/29/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



City anil County of San Francisco I Printed til '> -V I U on i -I " / 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, March 10, 2004 



040093 [Appropriate funding for program management services for the S.F. Public Utilities 
Commission Capital Improvement Program] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $5,460,000 of fund balance from the Water Department and $1,540,000 of 
fund balance from Hetch Hetchy. for a total of $7,000,000 for program management services for the 
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's (SFPUC) Capital Improvements Program for fiscal year 
2003-04. Appropriated funds will facilitate the fourth year of the WIP contract in the amount of 
$6,000,000 for the Program Management Organization (PMO) and $1,000,000 for SFPUC staff and 
other support services. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



040181 [MOU - Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2, Local 21) 
Mayor 

Ordinance adopting and implementing Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum 
of Understanding between the City and Count)' of San Francisco and the International Federation of 
Professional and Technical Engineers. Local 21, to be effective July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 
setting forth: (a) an addendum of terms and conditions of employment for specified covered classes 
working on capital projects; (b) modifications to existing MOU language addressing eligibility for 
assignment pay. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



040002 | Appropriate funding for the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility renovations! 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $1,782,000 from the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility 
renovations and a jurisdictional transfer of property under the control of the City and Count)' of San 
Francisco for fiscal year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

1/6/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



031640 |Airport - Amendment to Concession Agreement and Lease Agreement for Rental Car 
Operations] 

Resolution approving (a) Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for 
Rental Car Operations between Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent- 
A-Car Systems, Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of San 
Francisco, The Hertz Corporation, and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and the City and Count)' of 
San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission; and (b) Amendment No. 1 to the Lease 
Agreement for Rental Car Operations between National Car Rental Systems, Inc. and the City and 
County of San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact: No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

9/26/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at V:24 AM on 3/4/04 



3 1223 06447 3011 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, March 10, 2004 



031826 [Airport Concession Lease] 

Resolution approving Amendment No. 3 to the Amendment No. 3 to the Travelex America Inc. Lease 
Agreement for Foreign Currency Exchange in the New International Terminal Building and Existing 
Terminal Buildings at San Francisco International Airport Lease No. 99-0449 between Travelex 
America, Inc. and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport 
Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

10/24/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



031964 [Reserved Funds, Superior Court] 

Hearing to consider release of reserved funds, Superior Court fiscal year 2003-04 Budget, in the 
amount of $3,597,426 for administering the indigent defense program. (Superior Courts) 

12/2/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Budget Committee. 



031977 [Amendment to Agreement for the PGA Tour to Host Tournament to be held at Harding Park 
GolfCoursel 
Supervisor Hall 

Resolution approving and authorizing an amendment to the Master Tournament Agreement with PGA 
Tour, Inc., for the use of Harding Park Golf Course for the PGA Tour Championship Tournament. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

12/9/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving 
requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations] 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1 186, 1 187, and 1 188, to 
restate the full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for 
violations of the full-time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and 
regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE Heard in Committee Speakers 

Naomi Little. Taxi Commission; Barry Taranto; Thomas Owen. Deputy City Attorney. 

Continued to 2/1 1/04. 

1/28/04, CONTINUED AS AMENDED 

2/1 1/04, CONTINUED Heard in Committee Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission. Thomas Owen. Deputy City 

Attorney, Tara Houseman. James Kennedy: Mark Gruberg. Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana. Martin Smith; W. Biake Derby. 

Barry Taranto. William Guthrie. Brooks Dyer. Mulgeta Woldemariam. Anne McVeigh, Johnson Akinboaunsc, Mark Giogi. 

Dennis Korkos; Norma Geer; Michael Spain. Gerald Ganley: Jane Bolig. Robert Gross. David Basada. Jim Nakamura; Todd 

Rydstrom. 

Continued to 2/25/04. 



ADJOURNMENT 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 9 :v l \t <■» •" 4 o-i 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 10. 2004 

IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City, by the time the proceedings 
begin, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a part of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. Any 
written comments should be sent to: Committee Clerk of the Finance and Audits Committee, San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 
94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the 
committee clerk by that time may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 



(Not to be considered at this meeting) 

Rule 5. 40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREA TE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction. The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing. In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken. 



040194 (Employee Catastrophic Illness Program) 
Supervisor Ammiano 

Ordinance amending Section 16.9-29A(d) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize 
employee reimbursement of the Catastrophic Illness Program upon qualification for or receipt of 
disability benefits and amending Section 16.9-29A(i) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to 
authorize employee transfer of unused hours to pool if participation in Catastrophic Illness Program 
expires or is terminated. 

2/10/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance and Audits Committee, expires on 3/1 1/2004. 



City and County of San Francisco 4 Printed at 9:24 AM on 3/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 10, 2004 

Meeting Procedures 

The Board of Supervisors is the Legislative Body of the City and County of San Francisco. The Board has 

several standing Committees where ordinances and resolutions are the subject of hearings at which members of 

the public are urged to testify. The full Board does not hold a second public hearing on measures which have 

been heard in committee. 

Board procedures do not permit: 1 ) persons in the audience at a Committee meeting to vocally express support 

or opposition to statements by Supervisors or by other persons testifying; 2) ringing and use of cell phones, 

pagers, and similar sound-producing electronic devices; 3) signs to be brought into the meeting or displayed in 

the room; 4) standing in the meeting room. 

Citizens are encouraged to testify at Committee meetings and to write letters to the Clerk of a Committee or to 

its members, City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102. 

Agenda are available on the internet at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs.bos.htm. 

THE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL, ROOM 244, RECEPTION 

DESK. 

Board meetings are cablecast on SF Cable 26. For video tape copies and scheduling call (415) 557-4293. 

Requests for language translation at a meeting must be received no later than noon the Friday before the 

meeting. Contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554-7704. 

AVISO EN ESPANOL: La solicitud para un traductor en una reunion debe recibirse antes de mediodia de el 

viernes anterior a la reunion. Llame a Erasmo Vazquez (415) 554-4909. 

mm <&m&&mmm j j>®-hA&mmiiim$ 



Disability Access 

Both the Committee Room (Room 263) and the Legislative Chamber are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #47 Van Ness, and the #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, 

call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of City Hall at Civic Center Plaza and adjacent to Davies Hall and the 

War Memorial Complex. 

All meetings are real-time captioned and are cablecast open-captioned on SF Cable 26. 

The following services are available when requested 48 hours before the Committee meeting. This advance 

notice will help ensure availability. 

• For American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting, contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554- 
7704. 

• For a large print copy of agenda or minutes in alternative formats, contact Annette Lonich at (415) 554-7706. 
■ Assistive listening devices are available from the receptionist in the Clerk of the Board's Office. Room 244. 
prior to the meeting. 

• The Clerk of the Board's Office TTY number is (415) 554-5227. 

In order to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensit i\ itj or 
related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various 
chemical based products. 



City and County of San Francisco 5 Printed at 9:24 AM on 1/4JD4 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday. March 10, 2004 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine 
Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the 
people's review. For information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Donna Hall; by mail to Sunshine 
Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco CA 94102 by phone at (415) 
554-7724, by fax at (415) 554-7854 or by email at Donna.Hall@sfgov.org 

Citizens may obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance by contacting Ms. Hall or by printing Chapter 67 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code on the Internet, at http://www.sfgov.org/sunshine.htm 

Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements 

Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be 
required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance [SF Campaign & Governmental Conduct Code Sec. 2.100] to 
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the 
San Francisco Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102; telephone 
(415) 581-2300; fax (415) 581-2317; websitewww.sfgov.org/ethics 



City and Count) of San Francisco 6 Printed at 9:24 AM on 3/4/04 



,#2^%, City and County of San Francisco Clt y HaM 

/V^lifarvX ' Dr Carlton B 

nJ&^ffim Meeting Minutes Goodiett piace 

IjlLjK^jgwB )-nl San Francisco, CA 

\^^^^WSJ Finance and Audits Committee 94102-4689 

\i$U"?j^>x Members: Aaron Peskin, Gerardo Sandoval, Jake McGoldrick 

Clerk: Victor Young 

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:30 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 

Members Present: Aaron Peskin, Gerardo Sandoval, Jake McGoldrick. 



Meeting Convened 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

The meeting convened at 12:34 p.m. MAR { g ^ 

REGULAR AGENDA san francisco 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 

031975 [Year 4 Renewal of SFPUC Program Management Services Contract] 

Resolution retroactively approving the Public Utilities Commission's approval of the fourth year renewal of 
Agreement No. CS-524, Program Management Services, with the Water Infrastructure Partners (WIP) to 
provide program management services for the SFPUC Capital Improvement Program, for an amount not to 
exceed $1 1 million; and approving the Contract Year 3 performance fee for an amount not to exceed $497,000. 
(Public Utilities Commission) 






(Fiscal impact: No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

12/29/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Public Utilities Commission; Monique Zmuda, Controller's 

Office; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Mr. Leung, Local 21. 

03/10/04 - Amendment of the whole bearing a new title. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution retroactively approving the Public Utilities Commission's approval of the fourth year renewal of 
Agreement No. CS-524, Program Management Services, with the Water Infrastructure Partners (WIP) to 
provide program management services for the SFPUC Capital Improvement Program, for an amount not to 
exceed SI 1 million; approving the Contract Year 3 performance fee for an amount not to exceed $497,000; 
requiring that the PUC report to the Finance and Audits Committee as part of the PUC"s annual budget review 
process. (Public Utilities Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Peskin, Sandoval, McGoldrick 



City and County of San Francisco I Printed at 4: 14 PM on J/11/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 10, 2004 



040093 [Appropriate funding for program management services for the S.F. Public Utilities Commission Capital 
Improvement Program] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating 55,460,000 of fund balance from the Water Department and $1,540,000 of fund 
balance from Hetch Hetchy, for a total of $7,000,000 for program management services for the San Francisco 
Public Utilities Commission's (SFPUC) Capital Improvements Program for fiscal year 2003-04. Appropriated 
funds will facilitate the fourth year of the WIP contract in the amount of $6,000,000 for the Program 
Management Organization (PMO) and $1,000,000 for SFPUC staff and other support services. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Public Utilities Commission; MoniqueZmuda, Controller's 

Office; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Mr. Leung, Local 21. 

03/10/04 - Amend the title on page 1, line 10 after "services " by adding "; placing $2, 500, 000 on reserve. " 
and further amended on page 5, line 1 1 by adding "Section 2. Reserve. $2, 500, 000 of Contract Year 4 funds 
for Project Management Contract Services are placed on reserve pending a PUC report back to the Finance 
and Audits Committee, by July 30, 2004, as to the status of the expended and unexpended funds under the 
contract. " 
AMENDED. 

Ordinance appropriating $5,460,000 of fund balance from the Water Department and $1,540,000 of fund 
balance from Hetch Hetchy, for a total of $7,000,000 for program management services for the San Francisco 
Public Utilities Commission's (SFPUC) Capital Improvements Program for fiscal year 2003-04. Appropriated 
funds will facilitate the fourth year of the WIP contract in the amount of $6,000,000 for the Program 
Management Organization (PMO) and $1,000,000 for SFPUC staff and other support services; placing 
$2,500,000 on reserve. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Peskin, Sandoval, McGoldrick 



040181 [MOU - Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2, Local 21 1 
Mayor 

Ordinance adopting and implementing Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of 
Understanding between the City and County of San Francisco and the International Federation of Professional 
and Technical Engineers, Local 21, to be effective July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005 setting forth: (a) an 
addendum of terms and conditions of employment for specified covered classes working on capital projects; 
(b) modifications to existing MOU language addressing eligibility for assignment pay. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Public Utilities Commission; MoniqueZmuda, Controller's 

Office; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Jeff Rothman, Employee Relations; David Novigrasky, Local 2 1 ; Phil 

Ginsberg, Deputy City Attorney; John Omele; Ted Lake); Deputy City Attorney. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Peskin, Sandoval, McGoldrick 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at 4:14 PM on 3/11/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March JO, 2004 



040002 (Appropriate funding for the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility renovations] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $1,782,000 from the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility renovations 
and a jurisdictional transfer of property under the control of the City and County of San Francisco for fiscal 
year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

1/6/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Mr. Parkline. 

CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Sandoval 

Absent: 1 - McGoldrick 



031640 [Airport - Amendment to Concession Agreement and Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations] 

Resolution approving (a) Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for Rental 
Car Operations between Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, 
Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of San Francisco, The Hertz 
Corporation, and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through its Airport Commission; and (b) Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations 
between National Car Rental Systems, Inc. and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

9/26/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Continued to March 24. 2004. 

CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Sandoval 

Absent: 1 - McGoldrick 



031826 |Airport Concession Lease] 

Resolution approving Amendment No. 3 to the Amendment No. 3 to the Travelex America Inc. Lease 
Agreement for Foreign Currency Exchange in the New International Terminal Building and Existing Terminal 
Buildings at San Francisco International Airport Lease No. 99-0449 between Travelex America, Inc. and the 
City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 
10/24/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 
Heard in Committee. Speakers: Dave Fifer. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Sandoval 
Absent: 1 - McGoldrick 



City and County of San Francisco 3 Printed at 4:1-4 PM on 3 1104 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



March 10, 2004 



031964 [Reserved Funds, Superior Court] 

Hearing to consider release of reserved funds, Superior Court fiscal year 2003-04 Budget, in the amount of 

$3,597,426 for administering the indigent defense program. (Superior Courts) 

12/2/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Budget Committee 

3/9/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: none. 

APPROVED AND FILED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Sandoval 

Absent: 1 - McGoldrick 



031977 (Amendment to Agreement for the PGA Tour to Host Tournament to be held at Harding Park Golf 
Course] 
Supervisor Hall 

Resolution approving and authorizing an amendment to the Master Tournament Agreement with PGA Tour, 
Inc.. for the use of Harding Park Golf Course for the PGA Tour Championship Tournament. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

12/9/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

8. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Elizabeth Goldstein. General Manager, Recreation and Parks. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Peskin, Sandoval, McGoldrick 



031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving requirement 
and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations) 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1 1 86, 11 87, and 1 1 88, to restate the 
full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the fuil- 
time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee Speakers Naomi Little. 

Taxi Commission, Barr> Taranto, Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney. 

Continued to 2/1 1/04. 

1/2S/04, CONTINUED AS AMENDED 

2/1 1/04. CONTINUED Heard in Committee Speakers Naomi Little, Taxi Commission. Thomas Owen. Deputy City Attorney. Tara 

Houseman, James Kennedy, Mark Gruberg; Carl Macmurdo, Robert Cesana, Martin Smith; W Blake Derby; Barry Taranto; William 

Guihrie. Brooks Dyer. Mulgcta Woldemanam. Anne McVeigh. Johnson Akinboaunse; Mark Giogi; Dennis Korkos; Norma Gccr, 

Michael Spain; Gerald Ganlcy, Jane Bolig. Robert Gross; David Basada. Jim Nakamura, Todd Rydstrom 

Continued to 2/25/04 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Tom Owen. City Attorney's Offce; Rua Grafts. 
AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. 
Continued to March 1 7, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes 3 - Peskin, Sandoval, McGoldrick 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 2:48 p.m. 



City- and Count} of San Francisco 



Printed at 4:14 PM on 3/11/04 




SF U p 9 K! Ana ' ystR eportJ 
CITY AND COUNTY \*^SB^HSL)s} OF « . U , d,,c Library 

vicnael Sherrod-Rores 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



March 4, 2004 



ft 



>•; 



TO: ^ Finance and Audits Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAR - 8 2004 



SUBJECT: March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 
Items 1 and 2 - Files 03-1975 and 04-0093 



Department: 
Items: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

File 03-1975: Resolution retroactively approving the 
fourth year renewal of the PUC's Agreement No. CS-524, 
Program Management Services with the Water 
Infrastructure Partners to provide program management 
services for the PUC's Water System Capital 
Improvement Program, for an amount not to exceed 
$11,000,000; and approving the Contract Year 3 
performance fee in an amount not to exceed $497,000. 

File 04-0093: Ordinance appropriating $5,460,000 of 
Unappropriated Fund Balance Water Department 
revenues and $1,540,000 of Unappropriated Fund 
Balance Hetch Hetchy revenues, for a total of $7,000,000, 
for program management services for the PUC's Water 
System Capital Improvement Program for FY 2003-2004. 
Such funds will be expended for the fourth year of the 
W T ater Infrastructure Partners contract in the amount of 
$6,000,000 for Program Management Organization 
activities and $1,000,000 for PUC staff and other support 
services. 

On August 28, 2000, the Board of Supervisors approved a 
four-year contract between the PUC and the San 
Francisco Water Alliance for the San Francisco Water 
Alliance to provide program management services for the 
PUC's $4.6 billion combined Water System and Clean 
Water System Capital Improvement Program (Board 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Resolution 754-00) comprising (a) approximately $3.6 
billion for water capital improvement projects, and (b) 
approximately $1 billion for clean water capital 
improvement projects. The four-year contract, in an 
amount not to exceed $45,000,000, requires annual Board 
of Supervisors approval. 

Since the original contract was approved, detailed 
planning has focussed on the $3.6 billion for water system 
capital improvement projects and the subject contract 
focuses on that portion of the PUC's total capital 
improvement needs. The scope, resource needs, and cost 
of the now separate Clean Water System Capital 
Improvement Program are currently under consideration 
by the PUC. 

On June 17, 2002, during Contract Year 2 (September 22, 

2001 through September 21, 2002), the Board of 
Supervisors approved the assignment of the subject 
contract from the San Francisco Water Alliance to Water 
Infrastructure Partners, a joint venture consisting of 
Jacobs Civil, Inc. and Primus Industries, Inc. (Board 
Resolution 98-02). On February 26, 2003, the Board of 
Supervisors retroactively authorized the PUC to extend 
Contract Year 2 by three months, from September 22, 

2002 to December 21, 2002 (Board Resolution 02-1573) in 
order to permit the new Contractor, Water Infrastructure 
Partners, to perform Contract Year 2 work which had 
been delayed as a result of the contract assignment from 
the San Francisco Water Alliance to Water Infrastructure 
Partners. As a consequence, the term of Contract Year 3 
(approved under Board Resolution 03-0024) was from 
December 22, 2002 to December 21, 2003. 

File 03-1975: This proposed resolution would 

retroactively authorize Contract Year 4 (December 22, 

2003 to December 21, 2004). The total cost of Contract 
Year 4 is not to exceed $12,000,000, including (a) not to 
exceed $11,000,000 for the Water Infrastructure Partners 
contract, and (b) $1,000,000 for the cost to the PUC of 
managing the contract with existing PUC personnel. The 
$5,000,000 balance (total Contract Year 4 costs of 
$12,000,000 less this request of $7,000,000) would be 
funded by Water System Capital Improvement Program 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Source of Funds: 



bond funds previously appropriated by the Board of 
Supervisors, according to Mr. Jim Buker of the PUC. 

Amendment No. 2 to the subject contract, approved by the 
PUC in response to a request by the Board of Supervisors 
Finance and Audits Committee (Resolution No. 868-01), 
requires the PUC General Manager to obtain Board of 
Supervisors approval prior to making any performance fee 
payments to Water Infrastructure Partners. Under the 
proposed resolution, the PUC General Manager is seeking 
Board of Supervisors approval for a Contract Year 3 
performance fee payment to Water Infrastructure 
Partners in the not to exceed amount of $497,000. 

File 04-0093: This proposed ordinance would appropriate 
$7,000,000 from the funding sources shown in Table 1 
below. 

Table 1: Contract Year 4 Funding Sources 



Funding Source 


Amount 


Water Enterprise: Unappropriated Fund Balance 
Hetch Hetchy Enterprise: Unappropriated Fund Balance 

TOTAL: 


$5,460,000 
1,540,000 

$7,000,000 



Budget: 



This amount of $7,000,000 would pay for (a) the 
$6,000,000 cost of the Water Infrastructure Partners 
Program Management Office (PMO), and (b) the 
$1,000,000 cost to the PUC of managing Contract Year 4 
with existing PUC personnel, as shown in Table 2 in the 
"Budget" section below. 

During Contract Year 4, from December 22, 2003 to 
December 21, 2004, the PUC proposes to expend (a) an 
amount not to exceed $11,000,000 under the contract with 
Water Infrastructure Partners, and fa) $1,000,000 on 
managing the subject contract with existing PUC 
personnel, as shown in Table 2 below: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Table 2: Proposed Contract Year 4 Expenditures 
(December 22. 2003 - December 21. 2004) 



Task Order 
No. 120-4, 
Subtask 
Order No: 



Subtask Purpose 



Contract 
Year 4 
Budget 



Total 



001 
002 
003 
004 
005 
006 
007 
008 
009 



Water Infrastructure Partners Program Management Office 
(PMO) Activities: 

Contract management and resource management 

Work plan development 

Staff and organization development 

Planning and environmental management support 

Program strategic support 

Diversity program support 

Program reporting 

Technical practices and quality assurance/quabty control aupport 

Records management 

Program Management Reserve (10 percent) 

PMO Subtotal: 

Water Infrastructure Partners Project Management Contract 
(PMC) Services: 

Technical support for alternatives analysis and conceptual 
engineering reports 

PMC Subtotal: 

TOTAL CONTRACT YEAR 4 BUDGET FOR CONTRACTOR: 

The costs to the PUC of managing Contract Year 4: 

PUC staff 

Audit 

Equipment, supplies, reproduction costs 

Insurance 



PUC Subtotal: 



TOTAL CONTRACT YEAR 4 COST: 



51.321,000 
275,000 
494,000 
993,000 
688,000 
370,000 
538,000 
675,000 
100,000 
546.000 



5.000.000 



400,000 

200,000 

50,000 

350.000 



$6,000,000 



5.000.000 



$11,000,000 



1.000,000 



$12,000,000 



Mr. Steve Maiolini of the PUC advises that none of the 
budget for Contract Year 4, which began on December 22, 
2003, has been expended to date. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Comments: Contract Year 3 Performance, Independent 

Reviews, and Performance Fee Payment 

1. Section 4A of the subject contract requires the PUC to 
submit to the Board of Supervisors an annual report on 
the Contractor's performance over the preceding 12 
months by the December 21 contract anniversary date 
each year. According to the Clerk of the Board, the PUC 
submitted its Contract Year 3 annual report to the Board 
of Supervisors on December 29, 2003. The Budget 
Analyst notes that while this annual report is distributed 
by the PUC, it is prepared by the Contractor. Attachment 

1, provided by the PUC, contains the Executive Summary 
of the Contractor's annual report which lists the 
Contractor's self-determined 42 "major accomplishments" 
for Contract Year 3, from December 22, 2002 through 
December 21, 2003. The Budget Analyst notes that not 
all of these accomplishments are either quantifiable or 
complete. For example, two of the accomplishments are 
"Began development of Regional Diversity Program," and 
"Assisted in engineering, planning and scheduling the 
introduction of procedures." 

2. Attachment II, provided by the PUC, summarizes the 
PUC's assessment of the Contractor's performance for 
Contract Year 3. Attachment II shows that 26 task orders 
were delivered during Contract Year 3. The Budget 
Analyst has reviewed the task order evaluation sheets 
completed by PUC managers who were asked to rank the 
Contractor's performance on a scale of 1 ("Did not deliver 
as agreed"), 2 ("Partial fulfillment"), and 3 ("Delivered as 
agreed"). The Budget Analyst notes the following: 

• For PMO Subtask 02, PMO 2 - Work Plan 
Development, the Contractor received a total 
evaluation score of 2.13 out of 3.00 due to a ranking of 
"Partial fulfillment" for schedule, budget, and task 
management. 

• For PMC Task Order 55-2, Irvington Tunnel/Alameda 
Siphons Phase II Alternative Analysis, the Contractor 
received a total evaluation score of 2.09 out of 3.00 due 
to a rankings of "Did not deliver as agreed" and 
"Partial fulfillment" for timeliness, responsiveness, 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

5 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



maintenance of workflow and schedule, and 
submission of progress reports. 

• For PMC Task Order 57-2, Bay Division Pipelines 
Alternative Analysis, the Contractor received a total 
evaluation score of 2.19 out of 3.00 due to rankings of 
"Did not deliver as agreed" and "Partial fulfillment" for 
timeliness and submission of progress reports. 

• The remaining 23 of the 26 task orders have been 
evaluated as "Delivered as agreed." 

3. Mr. Maiolini advises that the PUC retained HDR 
Engineering, Inc., a Department of Pubhc Works 
contractor, to undertake an independent assessment of 
the performance evaluations completed by PUC project 
managers. HDR Engineering, Inc. undertook that 
assessment at a cost of $37,520 and submitted its report 
to the PUC on January 7, 2004. HDR Engineering, Inc. 
concluded that: 

... the evaluation process and results produced by the 
SFPUC Task Order Managers assigned to evaluate the 
[Water Infrastructure Partners] contract performance 
compared to specific performance measures and 
expectations during 2003 were conducted in a fair and 
valid manner. The cumulative evaluation results 
appear to be aligned with the intent of the San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors when they established 
the requirement of an independent review. 

4. On the basis of the HDR Engineering, Inc. report, the 
PUC General Manager is requesting Board of Supervisors 
approval of a Contract Year 3 performance fee payment to 
Water Infrastructure Partners in the not to exceed 
amount of $497,000 (File 03-1975). Mr. Maiolini advises 
that, as of the writing of this report, no performance fees 
have been paid to Water Infrastructure Partners for 
Contract Year 3. 

5. In fulfillment of the contractual requirement that the 
Contractor be independently audited, the Controller's 
Office has completed the following two audits: 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



On June 30, 2003 the Controller's Office issued its first 
review of the PUC's contract with Water 
Infrastructure Partners. The Controller's Office 
reported that for the six-month period of June through 
December of 2002 the PUC generally found that the 
Contractor performed its work satisfactorily. 
However, the audit found that the Contractor (a) did 
not always comply with payment provisions, (b) made 
some invoice errors, (c) did not obtain PUC approval 
before incurring certain direct charges, and (d) 
incorrectly used provisional, rather than the required 
actual, overhead rates. The audit also found that the 
PUC (a) had been slow in paying the Contractor, (b) 
made payment errors, and (c) had not implemented 
prior Controller's Office audit recommendations which 
would assist the PUC to better manage the contract. 
The audit concluded that both parties needed to 
improve their administration of the contract, and that 
the PUC needed to allocate adequate staff to monitor 
the financial and performance aspects of the contract. 
On August 18, 2003 the Controller's Office issued its 
fourth and last review of the PUC's prior contract with 
the San Francisco Water Alliance for the six-month 
period of December of 2001 through June of 2002, for 
which final payment of invoices are anticipated to 
occur by midway through Contract Year 4. The 
Controller's Office reported that the PUC concluded 
that the San Francisco Water Alliance had met its 
performance requirements. The audit found that the 
San Francisco Water Alliance (a) had not always 
complied with payment provisions, 0b) had made some 
invoicing errors, (c) had exceeded the maximum 
allowed employee labor rates, and (d) had 
inappropriately used provisional, rather than required 
actual, overhead rates. The audit also found that the 
PUC (a) had been slow in paying the San Francisco 
Water Alliance, (b) had made payment errors, and (c) 
had based the performance fee on billed rather than 
paid invoices. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

7 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Expenditures and Encumbrances to Date 

6. As shown in Table 3 below, as of January 2, 2004, the 
PUC has total unexpended funds of $17,632,121, or 
approximately 39.2 percent of the $45,000,000 Water 
Infrastructure Partners contract budget for Contract 
Years 1 through 4 (September 22, 2000 through December 
21, 2004). 

Table 3: Contract Years 1-4 Budget and Actual 
Expenditures, as of January 2, 2004. and 
Encumbrances as of February 28, 2004 



/~>~_4.*.„ „* 'V..-,. „ 1 IP 1-i a 

v. unuaLi icai auu jjApciluitULC 

Category 


Budget 


Actual 
Expended 


Total 
Unexpended 


Percentage 
Expended 


Contract Year 1 

Program Management Office (PMO) 
Project Management Contract 
(PMC) Services 

Subtotal: 


$4,100,000 
3.900.000 

8,000,000 


$4,130,127 
3,817.297 

7,947,424 


$(30,127) 
82.703* 

52,576 


99.3 % 


Contract Year 2 

PMO 

PMC Services 

Subtotal- 


6,000,000 

8.000.000 

14,000,000 


5,928,247 

7.676.597 

13,604,844 


71,753 

323.403* 

395,156 


97.2 % 


Contract Year 3 

PMO 

PMC Services 

Subtotal- 


6,000,000 

6.000.000 

12,000,000 


4,797,715 
1.017,896 
5,815,611 


1,202,285 

4.982.104* 

6,184,389 


48.5 % 


Contract Year 4 

PMO 

PMC Services 

Subtotal: 


6,000,000 

5.000.000 

11,000,000 








6,000,000 
5.000.00O* 
11,000,000 


0% 


TOTAL (including encumbered 
funds): 


$45,000,000 


$27,367,879 


$17,632,121** 


60.8 % 



* These unexpended PMC services funds total $10,388,210. 
** Includes $6,503,033 in encumbered funds. 



7. According to Mr. Buker, the PUC projects that Water 
Infrastructure Partners will expend the full contract 
amount of $45,000,000 by December 21, 2004, the ending 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



date of the contract, in order to escalate efforts to meet 
the expanding Water System Capital Improvement 
Program workload. 

8. While the Budget Analyst supports the PUC's efforts 
to accelerate the design and construction of its capital 
improvement projects, the Budget Analyst notes that the 
PUC consistently underexpended contract funds on PMC 
services during Contract Years 1 through 3. As shown in 
Table 3 above, in order to fully expend the contract 
amount of $45,000,000 by December 21, 2004, the PUC 
will have to fully expend a total of $17,632,121, or 
approximately 39.2 percent of the $45,000,000 Water 
Infrastructure Partners contract budget, between the date 
that the Board of Supervisors approves Contract Year 4 
and December 21, 2004. This amount of $17,632,121 
includes $10,388,210 of unexpended PMC services funds. 

In the professional judgement of the Budget Analyst, it is 
unlikely that the PUC will be able to expend the entire 
PMC services budget of $10,388,210 by December 21, 
2004. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that 
the Board of Supervisors Finance and Audits Committee 
reserve $2,500,000 out of the $11,000,000 Contract Year 4 
budget for PMC services, pending a report back to the 
Finance and Audits Committee, by July 30, 2004, as to 
the status of the expended and unexpended funds under 
the contract. 

9. At its April 30, 2003 meeting, the Finance and Audits 
Committee placed on reserve $136,000 which had been 
budgeted for (a) the development of outreach programs, 
(b) a draft crisis communications plan, other 
communications materials and news stories, and (c) a 
database of local and regional interest groups and 
community leaders. Ms. Annie Li of the PUC advises that 
these responsibilities will be performed by in-house PUC 
staff and that the PUC is no longer requesting release of 
those reserved funds. 

Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that the 
Finance and Audits Committee request the Controller to 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



return the $136,000 in reserved monies to the 
Unappropriated Fund Balances. 

Contract Year 4 Performance Measures 

10. The long-term performance measures for Contract 
Years 3 and 4 remain unchanged. As shown in Table 4 
below, there are seven short-term performance measures 
in Contract Year 4 as compared to eight in Contract Year 
3. 

Table 4: Comparison of Short-term Key 
Performance Measures in Contract Years 3 and 4 



Contract Year 3 


Contract Year 4 


1. Update the Water System Capital 
Improvement Program plan. 


1. Provide timely delivery of expertise to meet 
(expedite) the Water System Capital 
Improvement Program. 


2. Meet MBE and WBE target goals for the 
Program Management Services Contract. 


2. Meet MBE and WBE target goals for the 
Program Management Services Contract. 


3. Develop and implement a training program 
for the PUC. 


3. Support and provide timely expertise in 
partnership to further develop the PUC to 
(a) augment City staff, (b) increase and 
improve the quality and quantity of 
mentoring, and (c) develop the capacity of 
the organization to successfully dehver the 
Water System Capital Improvement 
Program. 


4. Develop and implement a Project Planning 
Implementation Plan for each Water 
System Capital Improvement Program 
project. 


4. Partner with PUC staff to orderly transfer 
consulting responsibilities to City staff or 
other consultants and conclude consulting 
services with qualitv and timelines. 


5. Develop and implement program control 
information and tools. 


5. Provide responsive services including 

development of work plans for the planning 
phase of Water System Capital 
Improvement Program projects. 


6. Perform alternative analysis studies. 


6. Support the PUC in the implementation of a 
quality assurance/quality control program. 


7. Develop performance metrics criteria and 
methodology. 


7. Timely services supporting project delivery 
for project management/construction 
management task orders. 


8. Develop a quality assurance/quality control 
program for the integrated Water System 
Capital Improvement Program. 





BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Future Plans 



11. Attachment III states that the PUC's contract with 
the Water Infrastructure Partners will be terminated on 
December 21, 2004 and that in order "to maintain 
continued progress on the Water System Capital 
Improvement Program, the PUC must manage a smooth 
transition of program management functions to City staff 
and/or other contracts that can support City staff with 
necessary temporary expert services." Attachment III 
details the PUC's plans to (a) transfer work currently 
performed by Water Infrastructure Partners to City staff, 
and (b) use as-needed contractors for their specialized 
expertise or to supplement staff. As stated in Attachment 
III, contractors and subcontractors under the current 
Water Infrastructure Partners joint venture will be 
eligible to respond to the Requests for Proposals to be 
issued by the PUC for future as-needed contracts. 

12. As stated in Attachment III, during the three years 
between 2005 and 2007, the PUC estimates that it will 
expend a total of $6,150,000 ($2,050,000 annually) for as- 
needed program management services contractors. 
Further, according to Mr. Buker, the PUC estimates that 
it will expend an additional $9,000,000 ($3,000,000 
annually) for as-needed engineering services contracts 
related to the individual capital improvement projects, 
resulting in total estimated contract expenditures of 
$15,150,000 for the three years between 2005 and 2007. 

13. Due to the PUC's ongoing reliance on contractors, the 
Budget Analyst recommends that the Finance and Audits 
Committee require the PUC to report to the Committee, 
as part of the PUC's annual budget review process 
throughout the term of the PUC's Water System Capital 
Improvement Program, on (a) the details of all outside 
contractors being used, including the scope and cost of 
each contract, and (b) the details of all City staff working 
on the program, including their classifications, duties, and 
salary costs. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

. 11 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Estimated Savings 

14. Attachment IV, provided by the PUC, is a summary 
of the savings in the amount of $312,594,000 that the 
PUC estimates will be generated by the subject contract 
with Water Infrastructure Partners. Based on a review 
by the Budget Analyst of the documentation provided by 
the PUC, the Budget Analyst is unable to verify that the 
Water Infrastructure Partners' contract will result in the 
reported estimated savings of $312,594,000. 

Retroactivity 

15. Although File 03-1975 is being submitted for 
approval on a retroactive basis, the retroactivity was 
primarily caused by a delay in finalizing the funding 
details under File 04-0093. 

Recommendations: 1. In accordance with Comment No. 8 above, reserve 

$2,500,000 of Contract Year 4 funds for Project 
Management Contract (PMC) services, pending a report 
back to the Finance and Audits Committee by July 30, 
2004, as to the status of the expended and unexpended 
funds under the contract. 

2. In accordance with Comment No. 9 above, request the 
Controller to return $136,000 of monies previously 
reserved by the Board of Supervisors to the 
Unappropriated Fund Balances. 

3. In accordance with Comment No. 13, amend the 
proposed resolution (File 03-1975) to require the PUC to 
report to the Finance and Audits Committee, as part of 
the PUC's annual budget review process throughout the 
term of the PUC's Water System Capital Improvement 
Program, on (a) the details of all outside contractors being 
used, including the scope and cost of each contract, and 
(b) the details of all City staff working on the program, 
including their classifications, duties, and salary costs. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



4. Approval of the proposed resolution, as amended, and 
the proposed ordinance are policy matters for the Board of 
Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Attachment I 
Page 1 of 3 



CO 

E 
E 

3 
</> 


> 

3 
U 

o 

X 

111 



c 
o 

o 

03 
CO 



X 



2 
2 



S? 



P P fi 

t_ S 5 

to 2 2 <« 



o E =k 5 "a 



'5 E 

o cd 



_ > j/3 

a a °- 2 O 

§ I § M 

co fc ° £ - 

>S- "O — c 

jig « E 

Si I & | 



QJ CO 

E 



O >^ o 

W « 5 

Q. c*- ci)5 

^ E o c co 

o 2 « = C 

CD "— ' & O 03 

§ 5 £ s & 

- E h- '" "2 

c o en co 



CO 3 



CO -,-;; CO 



s w E TO ~ 

co E ro cz 

e * 52 rr ° 

s-e - y E 

CO ° -J 

g> w cd CL en 

if 2 i= LL CO 

°- 2 S w £ 

— o ■—■ co 

coo- ° c E 

03 .(DO., 



o o a) t 



E c 



03 2 



> C C CD "C C 

2 2 S ° 2 

9-1 :« s o '= 

> 3 



a. -5 



TO 



U 



. — . Q) 
CO CD 
O 
DO 



3 i e 

E 03 



in .!5 > o co (D 

1 S 6 ™ E g 

8.8 o-it E * 

3 2 _ CO 03 

W 2 p n cb£ 

>te 2 03 co o c 
5 E 



o | 



en 



O < 



03 ■ & 

03 0. 03 

IB LL > 

co 



o 2 



C 03 03 

03 ^ £ 

03 2 ~ 

£ U Id 

3 -a 

in i c 

CO <0 03 



03 



p -c co 
2 2 £ 

t= 2 to o 



5 03 



E 4= 



co > t 

E 1 tt | 

W 03 CO g 

1— -C . (rt 

03 H 2 g 



"O Q) 



CD O 



o £ ° 5 

.2 "5 .2 Jc 



3 >, CO 2 

co -f 1 c *: 

O 03 CL 2 

X3 2 

Jn 03 2 ° 

m ~Z 2 



C\J 



LO 



3 § 



I o2g 

E 2 ^DD 

JlctD 

Q. R cp c 

03 ° D. CD 

^o2§ 
en— 3 en 
n c o .S2 

E 

t- 5) 2 o 

O lOr^s' 
O w-o"^ 

™ TO ^ 3 CNJ 

C\T » S CL JS 

CN £ ™ LL 5 

- 5 CO | 

03 P Q) ni 

-2 S 2 | § 
fi S ™ CM Q 

o 



E £ 



"- o ■» 

to CNJ CD 
03 L= « 



-^ *J r^Xl 



5 J= c = O 



si & 

a. 9- 03 co 
S ° o. 2 

•n "D 03 03 

" co > 



= 03 ,„ 03 ^ t-, U 

§>2..S ^^^ 2> 

< CO 

2 <! 



CO 

cj ~5 E^fi 

glial 



Q > 



8 o 



C C ti 



O CD 



3 Q. 



Q.T3 ^ - 

8.S o § g 

„£ o - E 

£ O 2 03 03 
■g 03 



03 



ro (/J 



^ b g -s ; i 

o Z fl 5 g E 

I s i-s °-« 

» o>-5.S-E-e 
Si jz ^ 

U) X3 
CD 



= 03 



CO 



co E 



CD 



CD 



o 

CD 5 
Illill 



03 g' 
CO 



LL O O 



-a Q. 5j CO O cj 

o -a 



- o CD • 

cd 2 c — o 

C -D 2 03 o 

t 03 o p 2 )= 

en -^ c 5 °- 

CD c ■— CL T3 — 

S CD - O S O 

t E 2 a c .2 

£ cn£ > 03 o 

5 co m 2 2 ^ 



== CO 



W "D CD 

§ te 2 2 



> 3 -° c 
S,S t3 w co.Q 

= 5 co-g ro -^ 



03 £ 



-^ CO 



o S 1 g S -d 

~ ,* > * CL = 



E O 
CO i: 

cb2 



CD 



CD W 

2 E 



£ cno 
co 2 A 



8 B 53-2- 

§§CL^ 
II CJ 

o'H,w -2 to 5 

CD S? ^ O « = 



43 O 

c jr 

8^ 



-Co 
CL 03 ^ 

2fe g 

CO CL B 



o 



CD ^ 

CL CO 
^^ to 

3 03 

co2 

03 It 

3 ° 

m "S 

c 2 

2 CO 

E 2 

03 c 

co- 
co o 

co -o 

S 03 

^ co 
E 2 

co 2 



CL CO 
03^ 

£ CQ 

CJ3Q_ 

C TJ 

3 C 

o ro 

2 9= 

2 
>^ 2 

-Q 2 

cl 

2/c 
E co 
cl en 

2 5 

03 

> ¥ 

03 > 
"O ■« 



c E 



!^ fi 

w is 

03 CD 

2 2 

T3°- 

2 £ 
"to ^ 



2 

>- 

„- T3 



i- =5. D. CO 
„ LL — 

(fi 



33 T3 



o o 



DO 



S s if|l 

I«ilH 

i= 2 < Q.^ 



5 S2 



x> ro ^_- 



"■ g 
2 I co 



(1) 


— 




CO 








CI) 


>- 


> 


-O 


o 


(1) 


CO 


o 


O 


m 


_J 


P 


a. 




ii 


o 
1- 


CO 





■a 


CL 


c 



J= f" 



& cj 

CO 

> ^: 

2 t5 

IB § 



C N . 

ro c5 E 
2 2 

co 3 |T 

ra ro a> 

2 to c 

3 9:5 
^ CD 

^"'§ e" 

"^ 03 

lit 

O CO 

c 



s o 

CO ^ 

CO 

CJ I 

to 

5-g 

CO 







CO 03 

E - co 
o o 

"- *z o 

CO g 

co ro en 
^ c 

V TJ 

C. 
ic x: 

BIS*' 

2 o 2 

=> E 2 

"O 
E . 

S|| 

oj^b 
c 5 
ro 0- co 
E to 

03 u_ 2 







>d) C 

3 E^" 
-*■ o 
t CO co 



•^ co S" 

Q. 

03^2= 



» 43 Z 5 



2 o to 



D. 



CO 



a 

E i- co E E co 
o o i_ o 5 

£ m ^ p 2 („ 
cl g ^2 w 

2 ^co^O'l 

i= „ i. ,t i: (0 

,„ CO C C C 

8 E? 2 g ° | 

03 CD D. 2 o a 
2 03^ E< 

.2 o co o 
2 2 cb " 



ro -6 LU 

. CLCO 
10 ^3 ~> 

d:9=S 

E 0^ 

L? C 03 
I- cr CD 

■c 



O O o 
H 0. Dl Dl 

CL CL CL p 

o o o E 

o 
> > > t 



QDQQ. 



LL 
D. 

co° 
I o 

|e 

^ 

1 2 

CL 

L?S 
Q. Q. 

2 2 

> > 


Q Q 



cooooooooo 



H CD cl 



14 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 3 



S 



5 
I 
S 



o 



> CD 


O 




'i= co 






™ "co 
E o 


O o) 








o 




CD O 


3 

"53 

c 






1 o 


o 




— o 


1 £ 

te o 

Q. CD 


o 




q3 2 
P « 

CO c 


CD CO *-> 


C CD 

P. o 


U 


CD O 



& > E 

2! co 0) 

$COq. 

w P E 

CO 2t3 

cf 2 CD 

iti 0- -c 



CD CD CD 

I- > "S3 



g>LU 

£| 

D- < 

C-J CD 



CD o 

aO 



CD 



CD 



E 

CD 

cl'x: 
p u 
E < 



CD CD "o 
"S3 "to CD 

lu id a: 



CD 
CJ 
O 
Q. 
0£ 
LU 
O 

ra 
E 
E 



E d 
ro g 



*■ C CD 



E 8 

CD CD 

2 & 

D- CD 
O § 

Cu° 



& cf 

JO o 

O g 

m- <=r 

■ O ^ 

Q. c CD 
O .S^g 

CD 



r- Cl> 

£ "a 



« E 

" CD 

__ Q. 

O C >> 

03 S CD 

M 01 F 



CD 



03 



£.2 

03 C 

11 



D> 2 te 

26^ 

CL = 03 

CD E CD 

£ M C 

** CD -Sj 

c ° s, 

CD CO O) 

Si - 



6 CD 
CD 

o o,J8 

■2 3 9= a. o S 

°>OQlL > CO 

2 TJ ^ CO CD "O 

03 Q= " "° "U ~ 
- LU o ro CD E 

C ts > o> 

|| 

en P 



-is •— -=r 

S S - CO 

» O TO " 



i £E 



C (0 3 J) rD 
■- fc CD CL E CD 

» cUc3 w "° 



c o 

CO 

E 



CD CO 

5 «> 

E co •£ 
«° E 



CD C 

S S, ° ° CD I 

X O 5 CD X Q. 

" a. a S2 cd — 

■O "g 2 CD * 
CO CD 



CD 



CO CO -£ CD 
J) U| s 
DJ C > 
cd x: 



c CD 

5 E 

•^ ° c 

> c o 

m CD - 



CD 3 CD TZ CD 
■D LL CO § fe 



CD 



—IOOOOOOO 



— -o aj c/) -o -^ 'g 

i cig^ Si 

O a3 2 "K o ■= co 

£ 5 Q M T= E « 

ni CD O 03 CD ^ co 

O.D O < 0. LU < 



o o o o o o 



o 

c 0. 

.2 CD 

ro£ 

••= S 

5'i 

-| 

CD § 



1/5 hi 
cd l 1 - 1 

C 00 



DO 2 

E2 

i "c 

5 CD 

O E 

c E 

P E 
E o 
o o 

5 "a 



5 ro 

w .2 

co • E 

e is 

ra .2 o 

CD ,. O 

— O CD 



Q. CD 

co ro 

■5 a. 
.5 -a p 
E Si 
5 E g 5 

Ifl CO i- 

i »t 

c^ 2 -= 

lu cL'co 

CD en CD 

> c > 

< c Q 

s J -a 

03 CD O) 
CD C CD 

o 5,CL 

= 1-° 

cd E c 

.9 CD CD 

icE 

O3C0 Q. 

03 "O — 

"T35 I 

is is 

i C -9: CD 

o) ol co) 



"E Lt 



• 3 

o 2 



co en E 
ro Q5 2 

j= ro 

goo 

0§l 






CD 


3 


CD 


n. 


03 


LU 


CD 


CO 





CD 

x: 


> 

CO 








(0 


3 


LU 





C£ 



. LU 
Q CL 



o Q. 



CD CJ 

'«? 

X3 CL 
CD LU 
? CO 

en o 

c ** 

c o 



ro ■!= .i= 
■b.cc 03 
<» 5 ro 

*= c: c 
§ g I 

o E"^ 

■— en co ro 

f 3 « n -m 



CD CO 



8 s ^ 



o ro j: 



o c: 03 



"co 



cp c 



S-fc 



■= cd y coi 

ESco-atL^gg 

gcDOCDcnpOn 

u " D S c m E o 

CD 



CD R" C CO CO "O 

(- LU — 01 n C 



•5 0) CO 03 



CD O C 



h- o 



CO CM 0) 



ST2-C0 C2)g 



ro 



Q) 03 C * 

El™ § 

"aj -^'E 2 

> "O £ c 
03 C O 
Q .2 £3 " 



O .> h~ 



O CD 



CD O 

> ■-=: 

O CD 03 



CO CD CD 



— >■ CD CD 
t £ g CL 03 
O CD c O r^ 



CD cd 



CD CO 

5.E 

cnxj 



co -■ = = 



■^ jo !2 - p 



CD co CO 
'■$ OO 
CD co £ 



o ^ ro & c= en 
. *3 i= c: 3 c 

CD O N 



cn 



CD 

■5 CO = 

03 -o 



3 (N E X3 C 
* 03^^03 



= Q. 



CL > Q. 



»co^ 

03 "D -o C 
CO £ CD O 

c S Si E 

co ro g-S 3 

O I- LU 5 2 



cd -a u 
-o c 



c Q> 

CO CD 

ct 
ro 

CO o o 



t a o 10 m 

O o O < - 



o o 



15 



At ta chment I 
Pa ge 3 of 3 



E c 

co cd 

r- a; 

.8 2 



! 

j 

i 



E o 
co 9- 
c E 
-a a) 
3 O 

1 2 

_- u. 
o CO 
§ (0 

o o 

O ~ 



•- 5 

*g. 

CO CD 

a -g 

Bi 



c .2 



s s 



c 


"n 


n 





□ 


t J 


c 




(1) 








TO 


LL 



o 

a. 

■- o c 

rj"r o 

cd .9. g 

§ i 2 

C (A g 

CO CO -~, 

0- < § 

o o o o 





LJJ 




c> 


o 


LL 


"* 






(D 












5 




c 


y 


o 



x- o 
CD O 



tfl CO-— - -^ 

<d o is o 



o o 2* o 



E £^.£ 



ro jjc 



CD 



a o -^ m 



co o 
■c o 

o CN 

R-C° 

CD o 

K o 

— CN 

- <° CD 



CO 
c 
a 


Q. 
LL 
CO 

tl) 


CO 

c 
o 


CO 

>> 

CO 


CO 

en 
c 


E 

CL 

o 

CD 


CO 


JC 


CO 


CD 

E 


3 
O 


CD 




C) 




CD 


c 




en 
c 

a3 


c 
o 

u 


o 


U) 
CD 

c 

CD 


c 

CD 

E 

3 


o 
'5. 

CD 


! 










r- 












n 

a. 



T3 


LL 


o 

ro 


"a 


3 
O 



§4= 



cd " -a 
.52, <d 



en 



o .c _ 

y ro 



CL CO _ 

co Y o .« °? 



< o 
c o 



CO 



CO 

I- <_> 
=1 CM 



■=<■= 

~ CD 



, CO 

O CD i_ 

x- o 
CD "O 



c 1>2 



cd 9- o -5 f§ 
o8 » £ .£ <S 



O Q_ 



< -5 



g CD ro * 



£ en K a 
c o .c co 

-> " 10 o 



in 

o 



o z 

l| 

j§ en 
tt cd 

o c 

Q. CO 

S-2 



n cd -^ CD 

O" - 



CO (J 

"2 3 

£ Cl 



T3 i-i. q CD * !E CO 

a 9: => s E I -a 

— O °- 

I "g co r >^"9. A" "5 co 

311 



CD O co CD CD 



-a co -a cd Cl 

S £ I § £ 



"O 



en 



u < or a: £ a a: 



CD CO 

_. > CO 

CD CD CD CO 



°-o 



en _ .y co 



co -c 

S o <fl 



j_ ±2 ■- O 

co CD g 

2 £ D- 

1 3 cn_ 



£ o -5 

0- Q.JB 

Q) co O 
eg" 5 



C c £ D 



<1 

>> CD 



ra-g 

.9 Q) 



O 



o^ a 



c C 
c: ro 0_ 
en q_ 

co - "O 

<D en cd 

y "ro cd ro 
e o o a 

5 c c x 

5-5 i' 03 

>,_a) cd "a 
IS 'S -E ro 

111 

12 M c 



co 

c 

S " 

C. CD 
3 C 

]S g 

gLU 

£^ 

o ^^ 
CD 00 

$^ 
Q.CL 

*© c 
c .9 

•S S 

ro c 

E 
E^ 

CD CL 
Q.E 

i'Z 

'■ofi 

m (fl 



I =§ ° s ■■§ 1 

ro y c ^ -=10 
o 

a. 



5dT3 S 



3 3 

O i= 

c w 

— c 

CD O 

o O 



r! o ro 



o .5 
a. g 

CD Q) 



CD 



O CD CD 

° O c 

ro IN 

x: ^ LU 

°- b co 

g cd is 

sib 

CD C •£ 

ra E 2 

2 [0 i: 



CD CD 

b^ 

|coo 

III 

7=, = O 



CD Jfl 



o 
a. 

: cd c 

5 2 E 

x- „- CO 



J£ CD 



O <A 

5?b 

CL r^- ti / ■. 



00 



ro o co 



, 5 



« C "S 3 ^ Tl 



0S0 



Co 1 a? -f 



- EE 
£ -9 ro 



CD CD C 

o\> ro 



c: co 2 

"3 0^5 



_ lu o 



C T3 
CD C 

E _ 

CL CD 



ro ro 2 

CL O 

X c^ -o 

cd 5 c 



. CD 

"S'P 



"O Q) 



QJ t: U ij 

S, ro - cd 



co !r co 



_ CO CD 

£. < a: 



i °-_ i I -i 



CD 

. C 

c o 

■S'io 

ro c 

S S 

E o-j 

a) o 2 

is § 

- C CO 
O g CD 

D E cl 
£lu b 

co CD *- 
CD £ .>< 

3 w m 

cd ro E 

D_ -^ ro 
ro t 

- £ £ 



co c: 
co _ 

CD T3 
Q c 

CD 



ro o 
en b. c: 

E 5 fi 
Q. o ro 



c ~ 



~^* 



(JO i; 
O *; O 

Cl ro ig 
d^2 
■a "2' 

III S. 

o -O 



£22 o1 cdcdcd^ 
-oCLQ.^ll EQOcODQ. 



ZJ CD 



D.OOOOOOOOO LUOOO 



^ CD 



CO n 



CM ~ 



"o £ 



c — 

cd q. 



Q. V 
c: cd 

S ro 

— ro 

I 2 
ro cd 
enp 



b 3 

CD £ 



03 r- 

c 



ro 



ro 



o ro 

t > 

q5 05 
Q. CD 

Q. £ 



CD fc 

^: ro 

Z E 

E 

c n 

O co 

co <; 

CO 

3 ■ 

CO 

.2 S 

■o Cl 

■o * 

1 E 



co S 



16 



Atta chtnent 1 1 



6 fP,U f 

O'' 



DATE: 

TO: 

FROM: 

SUBJECT: 



San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 

1155 Market St., 6th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 
Telephone: (415) 554-1853 • Fax: (415) 551-4695 

Email: smaiolini@sfwater.org 



MEM ORAN D U M 



December 10, 2003 

Alan Gibson, Board of Supervisors Budget Analyst 

steve maiolini, cip group, sfpuc 

Attachment II: Year 3 PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS SUMMARY 




The following is a summary of the PUC's current assessment of the Consultant's 
performance for Contract Year 3. 



SFPUC's 
Task Order Description Evaluation % 

Score* 


PMO-01 


WIP Oversight and Administration 


2.84 


95 


PMO-02 


Work Plan Development 


2.13 


71 


PMO-03 


Staff and Organization Development 


3 


100 


PMO-04 


CIP and Environmental Planning 


3 


100 


PMO-05 


Communications and Public Information 


2.5 


83 


PMO-06 


Diversity Program Support 


3 


100 


PMO-07 


Program Controls and Reporting 


2.9 


97 


PMO-08 


Cost Estimating Database 


3 


100 


PMO-09 


Engineering Practices 


2.9 


97 


PMO-10 


Records Management 


3 


100 


PMO-11 


Graphic Design and Audio/Visual Support 


3 


100 


PMO-12 


Quality Assurance and Quality Control Planning 


2.8 


93 


PMO-13 


Construction Management Plan 


2.64 


88 


55-2 


Irvington Tunnel - Alternatives Analysis 


2.09 


70 


56-2 


Pulgas Dechloramination Project Field Inspection 


3 


100 


57-2 


Bay Division Pipelines - Alternatives Analysis 


2.19 


73 


58-2 


Reliability Study - Phase III 


3 


100 


60-2 


Crystal Springs Bypass Tunnel - CER 


3 


100 


61-2 


Baden Pump Station Resident Engineer 


3 


100 



Subject to confirmation by the Independent Review Panel (IRP). 

17 



n L LQ LIIMICII L 11 

Page 2 of Z 



DtCfcMBER 10, 2003' 



64-2 


Regional Water System Performance Standards 


3 


100 


67-2 


Seismic Upgrade, BDPL 3 and 4, Hayward Fault 


3 


100 


71-2 


San Joaquin Pipeline No. 4 - Needs Analysis 


3 


100 


73-2 


Wastewater System Reliability Study 


3 


100 


74-2 


Communications Support 


2.9 


97 


75-2 


Executive/Commission Team Building 


3 


100 


79-3 


Polhemus Creek Slope Monitoring Program 


3 


100 



18 



^PO, 







Attachment III 



San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 

1155 Market St., 6th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 

Telephone: (415) 554-1853 • Fax: (415) 551-4695 

Email: smaiolini@sfwater.org 




MEMORANDUM 



DATE: February 3, 2004 

TO: Alan Gibson, Board of Supervisors Budget Analyst 

FROM: steve maiolini, SFPUC 

Jim Buker, SFPUC 
SUBJECT: ATTACHMENT III: WIP TO PUC TRANSFER PLANS 



Since the commencement of the Program Management Services contract, the PUC 
has recognized the temporary nature of the contract. The Program Management 
Services contract will be terminated on December 21, 2004. To maintain continued 
progress on the Water System Capital Improvement Program the PUC must 
manage a smooth transition of program management functions to City staff and/or 
other contracts that can support City staff with necessary temporary expert 
services. 



During Contract Year 3, under the direction of the Assistant General Manager for 
Infrastructure, Harlan Kelly Jr., the work of the PMO task orders has been organized 
such that in all cases WIP staff work in an integrated manner with City staff. City 
staff directs the work and WIP staff provides specialized expertise and/or 
supplemental services to address the temporary lack of sufficient City staff to 
maintain progress of the CIP. Also, WIP staff has shared critical program data with 
City staff on an on-going basis and, in most cases, City staff already has access to 
all Water System CIP information developed by WIP during the contract. This 
relationship between City staff and WIP staff will continue during Contract Year 4. 
Since management responsibility for the tasks already resides with City staff the 
focus of the Transition Plan is to assure that sufficient personnel resources, either 
City staff or replacement consultant resources, are in place at the appropriate time 
such that sufficient overlap is provided for a smooth transition of program 
management activities. Where necessary, special attention will be given to assure 
that all Water System CIP data developed by the contractor is transferred to the 
City during Contract Year 4. 



Continuing emphasis has been placed on transferring knowledge and skills to City 
staff such that many tasks that WIP has been handling will become the 
responsibility of City staff by the end of Contract Year 4. However, in several 
cases, replacement contracts for specialized expertise or supplemental staff to 
address rapidly increasing and dynamic workloads will be required. 



19 



EES5E3E 



: : s 



Attachment 1 11 

..Pa g e 1 o7 8 



The attached Program Management Services Contract Transition Plan describes the 
transition of the PMO task orders as well as the Year 4 programmatic task order for 
Program Controls funded by the PM/CM portion of the contract. 



For each task order, the table shows the number of WIP personnel budgeted for the 
task order, in FTE's and the number of City staff working in an integrated manner 
with the WIP personnel to carry out the work associated with the task order. In 
most cases, the number of City staff equals or exceeds the number of WIP staff, 
demonstrating the consultant's integration with and support of existing City staff. 
Overall, during Contract Year 4, about 30 FTE's of WIP staff will be working with 
and supporting the work of about 42 City staff. 

As Contract Year 4 ends the transition plan calls for an additional 26 City staff to be 
assigned to handle the tasks currently handled by the WIP staff, for a total of 68 
City staff providing the Program Management Services associated with the WIP 
PMO and Program Controls task orders. 



In addition to the 68 City staff, the PUC forecasts a need for about 9 FTE's of 
temporary expert professional services for PMO Program Management Services, 
which represents a significant reduction from about 30, FTE's during Contract Year 
4. During FY 04-05, PUC's expenditures for contractors for Program Management 
Services will significantly decline relative to the PUC's expenditures on City staff. 



During 2005 through 2007, the estimated total for as-needed contractors 
represents about 2% of total Water System CIP expenditures. In future years as 
total program expenditures increase, expenditures for contracts for Program 
Management Services will decline as a percentage of total Water System CIP 
expenditures, and the total expenditures for contractors for Program Management 
Services will be significantly less than 2% of the total Water System CIP. 



The PUC forecasts the need for the following contracts for Program Management 
Services over the next three years for specialized expertise or supplemental staff to 
address rapidly increasing and dynamic workloads: 



Program Management Services 


Estimated 
FTE's/Year 


Estimated 

Contract 

Amount/Year 


Strategic Planning, Organization Process 
Improvement & Facilitation 


1.5 


$350,000 


Environmental Management Support 


2 


$450,000 


Program Strategic Support Services 


2.5 


$600,000 


Program Controls & Reporting Services 


3 


$650,000 


TOTAL Program Management Services Contracts 


9 


$2,050,000 



20 



H L Ld L [lllie II L ill 



These additional staff and these professional services contracts for Program 
Management Services are a subset of all of the new hires and professional services 
contracts that the PUC will require to ensure progress of the Water System CIP. 

In addition to the above four contracts that will address the Program Management 
portion of the contract, the PUC will require an Engineering Services As-Needed 
contract, to supplement City staff and to replace WIP services for PM/CM portion of 
the Program Management Services contract for preliminary and conceptual planning 
services. 



The attached chart, SFPUC Capital Programs Staffing Plan, shows that both SFPUC 
staff and consultant contracts will grow significantly in the later half of FY 03-04 
and FY 04-05. A significant portion of the consultant work will be procured through 
project-specific RFP's. In addition, an As-needed Engineering Services will be 
required to supplement City staff to address needs for specialized expertise and 
peak workloads. PUC estimates the As-needed Engineering Services contracts, 
which will be awarded to multiple firms may provide a total of about 15 FTE's of 
professional services and the sum of the multiple As-needed Engineering Services 
contracts may total about $3,000,000 per year. 

Subject to State of California, City Attorney and PUC policies regarding conflict of 
interest and prohibitions of uncompetitive advantage, the contractors and sub- 
contractors of the existing Program Services contract will be eligible to respond to 
the Requests for Proposals for the above listed as-needed contracts. 



Individual Task Order Transition Plans: 

1. Contract Management/Resource Management: The contract 
management task for WIP PMO and PM/CM portions of Program Management 
Services Contract ends with this contract, except to the extent that contract 
management services are embedded within subsequent consultant contracts. 

2. Work Plan Development: Additional existing staff will be trained to 
develop engineering project work plans. Knowledge transfer of this task to 
Engineering Design Bureau staff will be complete by December 2004. 

3. Staff and Organization Development: Two additional staff will be hired 
and assigned to supplement the 1.25 FTE's of existing staff. In addition, one 
or more As-needed contracts will be created by June 2004 to supplement 
City staff in the critical work of developing the SFPUC Capital Programs 
organization to effectively manage the challenges of the Water System CIP. 

4. Planning and Environmental Management Support: Three additional 
SFPUC staff will be hired by March 2004 and seven additional SFPUC staff will 
be hired by December 2004 to supplement the existing 6 City staff FTE's. 
Three additional staff will be hired at Department of City Planning by July 
2004. In addition an Environmental Management Support contract will be 
issued by October 2004, to supplement City staff in addressing the growing 
workload and to provide specialized expertise in the tracking and 
management of program environmental and permitting issues. 



21 



ftiiacnmeriL in 
Page 4 of 8 



5. Program Strategic Support: Approximately four FTE's of City senior 
management effort are currently devoted to addressing program-wide 
strategic issues and developing the organization's capacity to successfully 
deliver the Water System CIP. This is an estimate of the portion of full-time 
workloads of about a dozen senior managers devoted to these tasks. An 
increase in City senior management effort, approximately equal to one 
additional FTE of senior management effort will be dedicated to these tasks 
as the transition proceeds. PUC anticipates a continued need for about 2 
FTE's of advisory Program Strategic Support Services by various experts 
experienced in the delivery of multi-billion dollar capital programs for a 
period of 2-3 years following the conclusion of Contract Year 4. The same 
contract may provide specialized expert advice on continued development of 
PUC's capital program delivery processes and procedures. There will be a 
three-month overlap between commencement of the new contract and the 
end of WIP services. 

6. Diversity Program Support: Seven existing Human Rights Commission 
staff will be supplemented by hiring three additional HRC staff by July 2004. 
PUC also plans to hire one staff to work with HRC staff to develop an 
economically disadvantaged business enterprise program for the regional 
portion of the CIP. WIP services are forecasted to end in August 2004, after a 
one-month transition period. 

7. Program Reporting and PM/CM Program Controls: About 11 existing 
city staff will be supplemented by five newly hired or assigned City staff by 
June 2004. After a three-month transition period services by WIP will end in 
August 2004. The PUC forecasts a continued need for about 2 FTE's for 
scheduling and 1 FTE for program reporting tasks on an as-needed basis 
primarily to address peak workload situations as the planning, design, and 
construction work of the CIP accelerates. 

8. Technical Practices QA/QC Support: The development of updated 
procedures and technical standards to support delivery of the Water System 
CIP will be substantially complete by the end of Contract Year 4. The peak 
workload for this task has passed and PUC will generally be able to rely on 
City staff. The Program Strategic Support Services contract, described within 
Task Order 5 may provide as-needed temporary specialized expertise when 
specific needs arise. 

9. Records Management: Three existing City staff will be supplemented by 
the hiring by November 2004 of one staff person with specialized document 
control system management skills. A transition period of one month is 
planned for this task. 



22 



y. - 



g Q W 

GO U BO 



3 &< 



-< - 



S 43 5 

§ g 
_ O o _ 

Q + U Q 



i. Q 

O JO 

5 r 






w — 



s w 

si 

o sr 



4 



3 £-2 



M U f< 



S fc 



S^j? 



w & 



a- -5 § 






Oh Q 






o m 

£2 



01 ai 



:8i 



2 < 

h ai 

U ob 

D Q 

Oh Cu 



-5 eg 

eg or 

oo O 



P* 'U — ^ 

o u ts xi 

S 'g u - 

&. C Cm 

,5 00 tH 3 



5 Q 



a. Q 






m ca 


CQ OS 1 


^ 


Q Q 


V E 


Oh 


W W 


0- Q 


_ 



(N « ITl N 

= £33 



< < 



Era 
O 



3 


ii" O 


n 


ra > 


>, 


>.^ 




w 2 




P a 


a 


^3 






| 


t: -2 




o t- 




a. <u 


> 


& a 


d 


3 H 


_y 


oo W 



U OS 



=1 


- 










u 


a 


4 


e 










- 
7. 


> 



= 00 

s i 

= en 

= n 

B e 

n a 

S IS 



OX 
ty 
- 



23 



Attachment II I 
Page 5 of S 



u 

u § 



< o 



Oou 
I I 
t5 t! 



£ 3 3 3 

£ M M 3 

>.=£ =y 3 

00 ^ ^h rn 

q a a w 

-3 O dJ -3 



E S 

o o S g -g 

B U S Mi? 

> > H a P- 

3 o cu 3 C 1) 



O u ■ s 



o Q Q 

E 



a 5 E ■ ra 



^2 
log 



2 5 

3 U 

| D 

3 Oh 



bo bo a .Si, m 

o o & o « 



h-1 Oh Oh 

u u u 

D D D 

0h Oh Cm 

bbH. 

00 00 CO 



Oh Oh t 9 



k a fa 



oo oo < 9 

Q Q J 2 

0h Cm Oh Oh 



5 w 
ca _o 

§ s 

E i 



'■*- Jg c w O "^ 

u ca. « a r« s 

s-2 ^Es.^5 



O C H" »H *^ SO [ij 



_i (J o c c c c 



w o p 



£B 



E E 



C 0, Q. 

•a o u. u 
« U oo Q 



3 £ ^ 

u 2 u 

U U Q 



u 

D 
a. clcl 

U 0) [i, 

a a oo 



o- ^ ca 

— a- ^ 
Q Q W 



0, 







BB 


■^- 




* 




















5 


p 




p 


■* 




-* 








TT 






u 


"i 




"l 


o 




o 








p 






Ea "E *o 


u 




d 


oil 




00 








cj 






£ £ W 


u 




u 


3 




3 








0) 






Q 




P 


< 




< 








Q 


^, 










■>* 
















*L 


p 




O 
"| 


© 


p 


p 















— g _ 

C3 q K 

35 u 5 


u 
d 
a 




o 

O 


3 


C3 


u 








> 



Z 








rr 


























o 






t 














"" a- 






"l 






p 














s — 

.2 a: 






a. 

< 






















"C -T3 








•a 


















O (D 








O 












a 






o • - w 




















:_ 






Si; 5 






i-" 


13 


















3 S 






ea 


|H 



















00 >>'o 






^^ 


O 












<J 






.aw| 






o H 


id 












a 






u a, a 
S *7 3 






5 ^> 
S .5 


U 

D. 












OI 

S - 

§ s, 

a -C 






rogram Str; 
ervices; 2.5 
xpertise & 
sed 






»8 

u 

a. 












^ - 






&h oo W c 






o- o< 


W 
























5 






O 










5m 

13 








g 2 

o ™ 

g 


00 

3 OJ 


Eh 

a 

3 

1/3 
SI 

p 


3 
< 




U 

G. 
00 

3 






3 



— 

- 




U 


CQ 
2 






o u 

eta 


2 O U 


£1 


s 

T3 




D 






U 

d 

c 


a 
o 




eg 


O. 






U U X 


CN 


< 




u-i 




P 






z 














^ 






"t/3 




*~~' 








^^ 




' — ' 




' — ' 


























s 


-r 


























rt 


o 












3 














- 
H 
U 

— 
- 

t/2 


1 

— 


0) 

5 WD 

s i 

as S 


5P 

Ma- 
li 
u 




Bureau Chief of 
Program 
Development 
Support 


n 

S 
3 

s 

c 

O 

Q 


o 

i u 

X X 

:|I 

oo oj 
.a .a 
> Q 


5 

3 
U 


O 

a 

a 
_>* 

u 






Bureau Chief of 

Program 

Development 


5 

B 

3 


3 
c 

a 

CJ 






>> 








u 


























D 


















u 




U 


< 


a. 








rj 












CQ 

s 

CL, 


Ba 
oo 

Q 
s- 


oo 
Q 
— 


u u 

oi si 




S 00 

2 H 


PL, 

Q 


PM 
00 

Q 

0. 




1 






s«= 















' — t ^ 












5/5 es 






U-i 








lO iy^ 












VI ,2 




3£ 




PT ^] ~ 






• ' 












•< on 


m 






(N m 


O U-, 


\o 




CI 






' — ' 


~^ 




- — • 1 — 


- — i "> — ■ 


1—1 




— 


*- 5 


























— — 






in 






w-j 




in 






T 




£fc 


CN 




fN 


<n 




(N 




u-i 




3 


— 


























« 


-r 
























0> 


s 






















^ - 


>H 


_; 








tf) 






an 








3 

CJ 


u 


n 








01 

u 


a 




a 




E 




a 

0) 


- 


m 




9 

7 




1 ° 

2 Q 


la 

BJO 

. o 




u 


— 




la 

Of 




oc 
N 

3 




1 


la 




a 


£ 









e 

la 




H 


O 

U 
- 




3 

la 


3 


c 


•a <- 


~ ^. 




« 




Ba 

S "5 




5 

^ 


rs 

r 1 


o 

.2 


u 

e 

u 


D. 
Q. 
3 


5 C 

lc 


!i = 




la 

en 


la 




u h 

& a 

* 




1_ 

3 

u 



5 


ri 


3 


— 


1/3 




* 2 oo 




— 




Ba U 




« 


— 


H 


>n 




00 


o 




I~ 








3' 



Page 6 of 8 



24 



tX^^.Ji.^O^KJ 



Attachment III 
Page 7 of 8 



III 




K 




13 

ce o 


i- 

< LU 

h h- 


5 !s 5 " 

S K i. <5 < 
K aj § 2 p 


£ Q- Q. O O 


5 O Q O h- 


H.+iil 




31d 



c-n_o^_ - 3nn..-i 



25 



Attachment I 1 1 
Page a of 8 









IT 


co 

Z 
< 




CO 

o 


3 
1- 
O 

rr 


Li 

CO 

-z. 


5 


>— 

LU 


£5 
2 


o 


n. 


a. 




u 


□ 


u 




D 


D 


■ 


■ 




01 

< 

LU 
>- 
-I 
< 
CJ 
CO 

LU 



31d 



26 



FEB-25-2004 10=44 



Pr-iB 



ga* 



TOTAL P. 09 



Attachment IV 



;fP"< 



J? 



San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 

1155 Market St., 6th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 

Telephone: (415) 554-1853 • Fax: (415) 551-4695 

Email: smaiolini@sfwater.org 




MEMORANDUM 



DATE: 



November 11, 2003 



TO: Alan Gibson, Board of Supervisors Budget Analyst 

FROM: STEVE maiouni, CIP Group, SFPUC 

SUBJECT: ATTACHMENT IV: Summary of cost savings 



Accomplishments 



Overall 

Program 

Savings 



Total 



> Significant cost savings from WIP support on the 
program are attributed to reductions in capital and 
long-term costs, and to containment of program cost 
growth. 



Capital Program Cost Reduction 



$47,000,000 



$25,594,000 



Bay Division Pipelines evaluations. 
See item 1. 



Contractor outreach program. See 
item 2. 



$22,000,000 CIP program procedures. See item 3. 



Long Term Cost Reduction 



$22,000,000 



$10,000,000 



$28,000,000 



Reduction in maintenance costs. See 
item 4. 



Reduction in operating costs. See 
item 5. 



Reduction in post-earthquake outage. 
See item 6. 



Cost Growth Containment 



$22,000,000 



$22,000,000 



$4,000,000 



$110,000,000 



$312,594,000 



Construction claims reduction. See 
item 7. 



Construction change order reduction. 
See item 8. 



Time savings from rapid mobilization. 
See item 9. 



Bay Division Pipelines. See item 1. 



> Capital program cost 
reduction of 
$94,594,000. 



Long term cost 
reduction of 
$60,000,000. 



Cost growth 
containment of 
$158,000,000. 



> Total estimating 
program savings of 
$312,594,000. 



27 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 3 - File 04-0181 



Departments: Department of Human Resources (DHR) 

Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Public Works (DPW) 
Airport 
Port 

Recreation and Park Department (REC) 
Municipal Transportation Authority (MTA) 

Item: Ordinance adopting and implementing Amendment Nos. 1 

and 2 to the Memorandum of Understanding between the 
International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers, Local 21 and the City and County of San 
Francisco to be effective Fiscal Year 2004-2005 (July 1, 2004 
though June 30, 2005) setting forth (a) an addendum of 
terms and conditions of employment for specified covered 
classes working on capital projects; and (b) modifications to 
existing MOU language addressing eligibility for assignment 
pay. 

Description: The proposed ordinance would approve Amendment Nos. 1 

and 2 to an existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), 
for the period of July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005, between 
the International Federation of Professional and Technical 
Engineers (IFPTE), Local 21 and the City and County of San 
Francisco. The proposed Amendment No. I states that the 
purpose of this legislation is to "promote efficiency of design, 
construction management and project management 
operations for the City's capital projects and provide for 
efficient resolution of labor disputes and grievances, thereby 
promoting the public interest in assuring the timely and 
economical completion of capital projects." In Attachment I, 
a memorandum provided by Mr. Geoffrey Rothman of DHR, 
Mr. Rothman explains how the subject amendments are 
intended to promote efficiency for the Water System's 
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects. 

According to Mr. Phil Ginsburg of the City Attorney's Office, 
the proposed amendments provide for (a) a Pilot Capital 
Project Incentive Program, (b) salary adjustments and 
assignment pay for specific classifications, explained in more 
detail below, effective for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 from July 1, 
2004 through June 30, 2005, when the existing MOU expires. 
According to Mr. Ginsburg, the continuation, subsequent to 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



June 30, 2005, of the Pilot Capital Project Incentive 
Program, salary adjustments and assignment pay described 
below would be subject to negotiation in advance of a new 
MOU agreement commencing July 1, 2005, subject to future 
approval by the Board of Supervisors. 

Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program 

Attachment II, provided by Mr. Ginsburg, is a list of the 47 
job classifications covered by the MOU. According to Mr. 
Ginsburg, the subject two proposed amendments cover all 
City departments that utilize employees in the 47 job 
classifications specified in Attachment II. According to Mr. 
Ginsburg, the departments most affected by the amendments 
would be the PUC, DPW, Airport, Port, REC, and the MTA. 
Mr. Ginsburg reports that there are approximately 1,000 
employees in the 47 covered job classifications (see Comment 
No. 3). 

According to Mr. Ginsburg, employees in the covered job 
classifications would be eligible to receive a performance- 
based monetary incentive equal in total to 50 percent of the 
savings attributable to the effective delivery of capital 
projects, as certified by the Controller (see Comment No. 2), 
relative to established benchmarks, with individual 
employees receiving up to a maximum of three percent of 
their base salary. Mr. Ginsburg states that each department 
with employees in the covered job classifications would 
calculate a uniform bonus for all covered employees in that 
department, and the bonus would be considered 
compensation for purposes of pension calculations. On page 
6 of Attachment I, Mr. Rothman explains the rationale 
behind the incentive pay proposed in these amendments. 

Additionally, Mr. Rothman reports on page 6 of Attachment I 
that performance criteria and benchmarks have not yet been 
developed by the Controller's Office and a Joint Union and 
City Management Committee (JUCC) that would be created 
under provisions in the proposed amendments. Mr. Rothman 
further advises that such performance criteria and 
benchmarks are to be completed no later than April 15, 2004 
(see Comment No. 3). According to Mr. Rothman, the JUCC 
will consist of five members selected jointly by the PUC and 
the DPW and five members selected by IFPTE, Local 21. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

29 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



According to the proposed ordinance, the Pilot Capital 
Project Incentive Program would be effective from July 1, 
2004 through June 30, 2005. As stated previously, according 
to Mr. Ginsburg, the continuation of the Pilot Capital Project 
Incentive Program, subsequent to June 30, 2005, would be 
subject to negotiation in advance of a new MOU agreement 
commencing July 1, 2005, subject to future approval by the 
Board of Supervisors. 

Salary Adjustments 

In addition to the above Pilot Capital Project Incentive 
Program, the covered employees will also be entitled to the 
following salary adjustments: 

1. Design Specialty Adjustments: The salary of 5203 
Assistant Engineer positions will be increased by two percent 
to align the salary at parity with 5265 Architectural 
Associate I positions and with 5262 Landscape Architectural 
Associate I positions. Additionally, the Principal Engineer 
and Principal Architect position salaries shall be merged and 
set at three percent above the current salary for Principal 
Engineer. On page 6 of Attachment I, Mr. Rothman explains 
the rationale for the proposed salary adjustments. 

2. Compaction Correction: According to Mr. Rothman, 
compaction is defined as an insufficient difference in salaries 
between subordinate and superior classes in a series. For 
example, the salary of a Clerk Typist might be only slightly 
less that the salary of a Senior Clerk Typist. To address 
compaction issues arising from the proposed MOU 
amendments, the proposed amendments will increase the 
salary by two percent for the following technical engineering 
positions: Mechanical Engineering Associate I, Electrical 
Engineering Associate I, Civil Engineering Associate I, and 
Engineering Associate II. On page 6 of Attachment I, Mr. 
Rothman explains the rationale for the proposed salary 
adjustments. 

Assignment Pay Increases 

In addition to the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program 
and Salary Adjustments described above, the covered 
employees will also be entitled to the following assignment 
pay: 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



1. Leadership Pay: Employees that perform certain 
leadership duties are eligible to receive a five percent 
premium over base salary for hours that such duties are 
actually performed. Such leadership duties include Project 
Engineer, Architect, Landscape Architect, Resident 
Engineer, Computer Aided Design (CAD) Manager (technical 
engineering classes only), and Flexible Lead (defined as a 
leader of one's peers) positions. On pages four and five of 
Attachment I, Mr. Rothman explains the rationale for the 
proposed Leadership Pay. 

2. Special Skills Pay: Employees that perform certain 
specialized duties nearly full-time are eligible to receive a 
five percent premium over base salary for the duration of the 
assignment. Such specialized duties include Scheduler, Cost 
Estimator, and Geotechnical Engineer positions. On pages 
four and five of Attachment I, Mr. Rothman explains the 
rationale for the proposed Special Skills Pay. 

3. Public Utilities Commission/ Capital Improvement 
Projects Planning Function Assignment Pay: 

Employees that perform certain duties including the 
directing of environmental reviews and regulatory 
compliance for the City's Capital Improvement Projects and 
their deliverables from the planning phase to post- 
construction will receive a five percent premium over base 
salary for hours that those duties described above are 
actually worked. Such positions include Planner II, Planner 
III, Planner IV, Regulatory Specialist, Utility Specialist, and 
Biologist I and II positions. On page 6 of Attachment I, Mr. 
Rothman explains the rationale for the proposed premium 
pay. 

According to the proposed ordinance, the proposed salary 
adjustments and assignment pay would be paid through the 
MOU, beginning July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005. As 
stated previously, according to Mr. Ginsburg, the 
continuation of paying such salary adjustments and 
assignment pay described above would be subject to 
negotiation in advance of a new MOU agreement 
commencing July 1, 2005, subject to future approval by the 
Board of Supervisors. According to Mr. Ginsburg, it is 
possible that the continuation of such salary adjustments 
and assignment pay could be denied. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

The proposed MOU amendment would also provide for 
continuous testing to produce ranked lists of potential 
employees. According to Mr. Rothman, continuous testing 
means that once a job is announced, it stays open, which 
allows new candidates to apply for and test for such positions 
continuously. Also, the proposed amendments adhere to 
certain certification rules, called "Rule of the List," where 
candidates are ranked according to test scores and any 
individual who qualifies for the position can be hired from 
the list. This certification rule contrasts with, for example, 
the "Rule of Three" where a department can only select from 
the candidates on a list with the three highest test scores. 

Comments: 1. According to Mr. Rothman, it is "highly unlikely" that 

someone covild receive more than one of the salary 
adjustments or assignment pay increases described above. 
However, the Budget Analyst notes there is no prohibition 
under this proposed legislation to prevent an individual 
covered employee from receiving more than one salary 
adjustment or assignment pay increase. For example, an 
employee could receive both Leadership Pay and Special 
Skills Pay, for a total salary increase of 10 percent. Further, 
that employee could also be eligible to receive incentive pay 
under the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program, which 
could represent a further three percent over base salary. 

2. According to Ms. Monique Zmuda of the Controller's Office, 
the Controller is currently in discussions with the City's 
labor negotiators concerning the implementation of the 
certification of savings for the Pilot Capital Project Incentive 
Program. Ms. Zmuda states that the Controller will be able 
to provide more information on this provision directly to the 
Finance and Audits Committee at the meeting of March 10, 
2004. The Budget Analyst recommends that the Controller 
submit a written report to the Finance and Audits 
Committee explaining the final methodology for 
determination of the "certification of savings" pertaining to 
the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program. 

3. According to Mr. Rothman, the performance criteria and 
benchmarks for the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program 
have not yet been developed by the Controller's Office and 
the JUCC. Such criteria and benchmarks are anticipated to 
be completed no later than April 15, 2004. The Budget 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Analyst recommends that the Controller's Office and the 
JUCC submit a written report to the Finance and Audits 
Committee detailing the performance criteria and 
benchmarks developed for the Pilot Capital Project Incentive 
Program. 

4. According to Mr. Rothman on page one of Attachment I, 
the proposed MOU amendments intend to "aid the City in its 
completion of capital projects, most significantly the PUC's 
Capital Improvement Program to rebuild the Hetch-Hetchy 
water system." However, the Budget Analyst notes that the 
MOU amendments cover approximately 1,000 design, 
construction management, and project management 
employees in six City departments, as listed in Attachment 
II, irrespective of whether or not the employees are working 
on capital improvement projects (with the exception of the 
Assignment Pay increases, which specify that eligibility is 
based on work performed on CIP projects). Additionally, the 
Budget Analyst notes that the allocation of a uniform bonus 
in the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program to all 
applicable employees in a department does not distinguish 
between those specific employees who identified the savings 
attributable to the effective delivery of capital projects and 
those employees who were working on unrelated projects. 

5. On pages three and four of Attachment I, Mr. Rothman 
states that the proposed MOU amendments are necessary in 
order to (a) recruit and retain "quality personnel ... in the 
current highly competitive environment for professional 
engineers and related capital project occupations," (b) hire as 
quickly as possible, (c) create professional opportunities "for 
as many city personnel as possible," (d) recognize employee 
skills, (e) facilitate "management flexibility and discretion in 
assignments," and (f) create "incentives for achieving project 
savings." 

The Budget Analyst questions that the above reasons, as 
stated by Mr. Rothman, justify the proposed pay increase in 
the current depressed job market, particularly given: (a) the 
lack of evidence provided regarding job market factors, such 
as low recruitment or retention rates, (b) the lack of analysis 
of the specific reasons for hiring delays in the City's current 
recruitment and hiring process, (c) the promotional and skills 
development opportunities being provided by the new Water 
System CIP positions already in place for the PUC, and (d) 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

City departments' existing ability to substitute or create, 
through the budgetary process, appropriate job 
classifications to achieve desired work outcomes. 

6. According to Ms. Michelle Allersma of the Controller's 
Office, estimates of the cumulative cost of the subject 
amendments, above the existing FY 2004-2005 MOU 
provisions, will be provided directly to the Finance and 
Audits Committee at the meeting of March 10, 2004 

Recommendations: 1. In accordance with Comment No. 2, request the 

Controller's Office to submit a written report to the Finance 
and Audits Committee explaining the final methodology for 
determination of the "certification of savings" pertaining to 
the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program. 

2. In accordance with Comment No. 3, request the 
Controller's Office and the Joint Union and City 
Management Committee (JUCC) to submit a written report 
to the Finance and Audits Committee upon final 
development of the performance criteria and benchmarks for 
the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program. 

3. Because the Budget Analyst has not reviewed (a) either 
how the "certification of savings" will be determined by the 
Controller's Office for the monetary incentives to be paid 
under the Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program, (b) the 
performance criteria and benchmarks for the Pilot Capital 
Project Incentive Program as developed by the Controller's 
Office and the JUCC, or (c), the Controller's cost estimates 
pertaining to the fiscal impact of this proposed legislation, 
the Finance and Audits Committee may wish to continue this 
item until such information is made available for an 
independent analysis by the Budget Analyst. 

4. Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Attachment I 

Page 1 of 7 



March 2, 2004 

To: Office of the Budget Analyst 
From: Geoffrey Rothman, ERD 

Re: Local #21 MOU CfP Amendment 



This memo responds to your Office's request for supplemental information 
regarding how the Local 21 Capital Projects MOU Addendum ("Amendment") will aid 
the City in its completion of capital projects, most significantly the PUC's Capital 
Improvement Program to rebuild the Hetch-Hetchy water system. We believe that all of 
your questions are answered below. 

I 

Background 

A. The Importance of the PUC's CfP and Related Capital Projects 

The PUC's water delivery system serves nearly 2.4 million customers in four Bay 
Area counties. Using a complex system of dams, reservoirs, treatment plants, pump 
stations, tunnels, pipelines, and valves, the PUC transports much of its water to the Bay 
Area from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir nearly 150 miles away. 

Some parts of the PUC's water delivery system are nearly 75 years old and are in 
dire need of repair and replacement. Parts of the system do not meet modem seismic 
standards. 

Over the last decade, the PUC has attempted to repair its water delivery system. 
The PUC has now developed a master capital plan to modernize and voters passed 
Propositions A and E to ensure that funding is available to complete this ambitious 
program in a timely manner. 

Yet, stakeholders at the state level and in other Bay Area counties have expressed 
concerns. In February 2000, for example, the State Auditor issued a report expressing 
serious concerns about the PUC's ability to complete this project and noted: 

Given the size, complexity, age, and declining condition of the commission's 
water delivery system, this project completion rate appears low. There are many 
reasons. . ..ranging from a shortage of project managers on staff to operational 
deficiencies such as a lack of up-to-date procedures for awarding contracts and for 
planning, designing, and constructing capital projects. 

The State Auditor issued recommendations that the PUC improve contracting, 
hiring, cost and schedule estimating among other operational issues. 



35 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 7 



B. The 2003-2005 Negotiation Process with Local 21 

Negotiations with Local 21 over a successor MOU, effective July 1, 2003 began 
in February 2003. The City entered into negotiations facing a historic budget deficit and 
significant retrenchment in the size of City government. Ultimately, the City asked all of 
its labor unions for $90 million in wage concessions and eliminated approximately three 
hundred (300) positions from the City budget. 

In such a difficult economic climate, the City's negotiation objectives with Local 
21 over the PUC's CJJP and other significant capital projects were unique. First, capital 
projects were the one growth industry in the City. In addition to the PUC's CEP, the City 
is also involved with such major capital projects as the PUC's Clean Water Program, the 
Laguna Honda Hospital program, and the Third Street Light Rail extension. Although 
most City departments were forced to cut programs and reduce services, the PUC is 
increasing staffing to meet the demand for service. Second, capital projects have little 
general fund impact. Third, the City needed to negotiate increased management 
flexibility with Local 21 on the issues of hiring, contracting and assignments. Fourth, to 
ensure timely completion of the Hetch-Hetchy rebuild and other capital projects, the City 
sought to improve its working relationship with Local 21 by creating specific terms and 
conditions of employment both parties understood and agreed to abide by during the 
course of the program. 

To address these unique issues, the parties agreed to a reopener with Local 21 on 
the PUC's CEP and other significant capital projects. Section EI.P. of the City's 2003- 
2005 MOU with Local 21 that provides as follows: 



The parties agree that timely and successful implementation of the PUC's Capital 
Improvement Program (CEP) is among their highest priorities, and that changes in 
the terms and conditions of employment set forth in this Agreement that are 
unique to CIP projects may facilitate the achievement of their mutual goal. The 
parties therefore agree that a separate [Agreement] will be negotiated governing 
wages and working conditions specific to long-term projects and their impact on 
other engineering related classes. ... 

In a report commissioned by The Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation 
Agency (BAWSCA), dated January 2004, success of the PUC's CIP was directly linked 
to some of the preliminary work the City and its PUC has undertaken with Local 21. The 
report noted: 

[T]o its credit, SFPUC has taken many steps focused on successful CEP 
completion including [the negotiation of] a memorandum of understanding with 
Local 21 regarding approaches to project staffing. 



36 



Attachment I 

Page 3 of 7 



II 
The City's Challenges 



A. Overall Goals 



The City's overall goals in its capital improvement projects and the attached 
contract amendment include: 

• Hi gh Quality of project outcomes 

• On Time completion of projects 

• On Budg et conformance to funding and project costs 

Each of the solutions provided by the amendment conforms to and advances these goals. 



B. Staffing 

The staffing needs addressed by this amendment include: 

• The objective of performing as much project work as possible with in-house 
staff, and; 

• The need to recruit and retain quality personnel, especially in the current 
highly competitive environment for professional engineers and related capital 
project occupations; 

• The need to meet staffing needs quickly consistent with best hiring practices 
and merit system principles; 

« Ensuring that the City remains competitive in the engineering and technical 
engineering project market; 

• In a period of retrenchment, create opportunity for as many city personnel as 
possible. 

C. Contracting Out 

• Clarification of the types of work that can or should be contracted out as 
opposed to work that can be performed by City staff. 

D. Labor Management Relations 

• The enunciation of labor strategies which define and regulate the utilization of 
labor; 

• Defined processes and guidelines for effective labor relations to resolve labor 
problems quickly and at low levels in order to avoid delays in the project 
schedule and added costs to the project budget; 



Attachment I 

Page 4 of 7 

Compensation 

• Recognition of project management 

• Recognition of various emerging skill sets not presently classified 

• Maintenance of management flexibility and discretion in assignments 

• The creation of incentives for achieving project savings 



III 

Solutions 



A. Staffing 

Under the current recruitment and examination program it has taken as long as 
two years to complete examinations and hiring for engineering and related classifications. 
It is essential that the staffing program, particularly given the reliance on in-house staff, 
be efficient, expedient and immediately responsive to departmental staffing needs. This 
agreement provides for a modem human resource staffing process, using continuous 
eligible lists, with a variety of certification rules, which can help achieve the needs of 
employing departments while preserving merit system rights of candidates. 



B. Contracting Out 

The amendment creates guidelines and a process that will ensure the optimum and 
most efficient combined use of both external and internal resources. Work will be 
performed with as much in-house staff to maximize merit system hiring opportunities, to 
utilize existing institutional memory and expertise and to ensure City staff develops a 
future capacity to maintain the water system by creating a next generation of City 
employees with institutional capacity and memory. 

Work will be contracted out when necessary to address peak workloads, 
specialized expertise beyond the capacity of in-house staff and for emergencies. 
Significantly, the City and Local 21 have reached a framework that utilizes clear 
definitions and guidelines to analyze contracting decisions that should minimize delay 
and disruption over this difficult labor issue. 

C. Compensation 

1. Leadership and Special Skills Pay 

Leadership pay is an essential component of a matrix/project structure, which is 
typical in large engineering projects. The CIP operates on a massive scale, which 
requires, in addition to the overall Project Managers, sub-leaders in each phase. In 
addition to overall project management, capital projects require accountability over 



38 



Attachment I 

Pa ge b or 7 

various parts of projects. Project engineers, a key leadership assignment, manage delivery 
of project outcomes. Leadership pay recognizes the added value of the project 
leadership, and reinforces direct accountability for the delivery of project outcomes. 

Leadership pay supports management's need to support the team structure in a 
project environment. Leadership pay creates parity between engineering staff and project 
management. Finally, the leadership pay solution provides management with the right of 
assignment, and limits special pay to the duration of the assignment, and only for time 
actually worked. 

Some of the CEP work involves emerging duties not now assigned or performed 
by City staff on a regular basis. Such pay incentivizes individuals to acquire new skills 
that are vital to project success, including cost estimating and scheduling skills 
specifically referenced in the State Auditor's report. 

Specialty pay provides an efficient and less expensive alternative to creating new 
classes to recognize skills and duties. When new duties and skills emerge, typically the 
city has classified the duties through the lengthy and complex civil service based process, 
followed by bargaining over pay levels, and the administration of selection procedures. 
These labor intensive and complex activities make it difficult for management to act 
quickly and to retain considerable discretion in the assignment of work. 

The administration of all forms of special pay, including leadership and special 
skills, are determined based on the definitions contained in the MOU. The contract- 
defined approach is used for all forms of premium pay which are defined either in labor 
contracts and/or in related salary ordinances. Initial determination of eligibility for 
premium pay is made by the assigning department based on the contract definition. To 
the extent that there are questions or disputes, the pay practice may be audited by the 
Department of Human Resources or the Controllers PPSD, and may be subject to 
grievance. Typically, PPSD creates pay codes and pay rules to track premium pay 
categories of which allows ongoing financial evaluation of use and cost. 



39 



Attachment I 

Page 6 of 7 

2. Classification Adjustments 

In order to simplify the City's classification and pay structure some classification 
consolidation in the design and related classes is taking place concurrently with this 
Amendment. A central objective of the consolidation is the alignment of classes to 
common levels, including salary rates. This consolidation and alignment will provide 
that work which requires the same level of training, experience and licensure is 
compensated at the same level. A related pay plan objective is the maintenance of salary 
intervals between related classes at a level that encourages career advancement and skill 
development. The City and most other public sector employers maintain pay intervals in 
promotive classes that recognize increasing responsibility and complexity in 
progressively higher job classes in a series. The compaction adjustments in this 
amendment further that objective. 



3. Incentive Pay 

Currently, virtually all City compensation is based on an entitlement strategy. 
That is, as long as employees are performing at a satisfactory level they receive the 
negotiated rate. Consequently, there is no specific incentive for employees to create 
more cost efficient and timesaving work measures. Throughout private industry it has 
long been recognized that performance based pay is an essential principle in performance 
motivation and work outcomes. The incentive program described in this amendment is 
an effort to institute industry practices that both generate real savings and share those 
savings with employees. The program involves no risk to the City ~ as only savings 
certified by a neutral and credible party, the Controller, are shared. If there are no 
savings, there is no payment. 

At this time the benchmarks and performance criteria that will be used for the 
Pilot Capital Project Incentive Program are being developed. They will be designed to 
measure timeliness, budgetary discipline and quality at appropriate segments of ongoing 
capital projects in each department. These efforts involve the Controller's office and the 
operating departments. 



D. Labor Management Relations 

This agreement establishes ground rules for the parties to utilize in order to solve 
a variety of potential disputes at a low level when they arise. The joint labor 
management committee (JUCC) provides for the solution of problems within defined 
guidelines in a manner that is immediate and can prevents project delays, inefficiencies, 
and additional cost. 



40 



Attachment I 

Page 7 of 7 

c.c. Philip Ginsburg, Deputy City Attorney 
Andrea Gourdine, DHR 
Carol Isen, PUC/CIP 



41 



Scope of Agreement 

Covered Classes: Agreement governs the following Local 21 represented design 
construction management and project management classifications. 

5120 Architectural Administrator 
5 1 74 Administrative Engineer 
5201 Junior Engineer 
5203 Assistant Engineer 
5205 Associate Materials Engineer ' ' ' 
• 5207 Associate Engineer 

5211 Senior Engineer 

5212 Principal Engineer 

5218 Structural Engineer 

5219 Senior Structural Engineer 
5241 Engineer 

5260 Architectural Assistant I 

3261 Architectural Assistant JJ 

5262 Landscape Architect Associate I 

5265 Architectural Associate I 

5266 Architectural Associate II 
5268 Architect 

5270 Senior Architect 

5272 Landscape Architect Associate JJ 

5273 Principal Architect 

5274 Landscape Architect 

5275 Senior Landscape Architect . 

5304 Materials Testing Aide 

5305 Materials Testing Technician 
5310 Survey Assistant I 

5312 Survey Assistant U 

5314 Survey Associate 

5316 Chief Surveyor 

5342 Mechanical Engineering Assistant I 

5344 Mechanical Engineering Assistant JJ 

5346 Mechanical Engineering Associate I 

5350 Electrical Engineering Assistant I 

5352 Electrical Engineering Assistant JJ 

5354 Electrical Engineering Associate I 

5362 Civil Engineering Assistant 

5364 Civil Engineering Associate I 

5366 Engineering Associate JJ 

5502 Project Manager I 

5504 Project Manager U 

5506 Project Manager JJI 

5508 Project Manager IV 

5620 Regulatory Specialist 

6318 Construction Inspector 

6335 Disability Access Coordinator 

9195 Light Rail Vehicle Equipment Engineer 

9196 Senior Light Rail Vehicle Engineer 

9197 Signal & Systems Engineer 42 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Item 4 - File 04-0002 

Department: 

Item: 



Superior Court 

Ordinance appropriating $1,782,000 from the Courthouse 
Construction Fund to fund court facility interior 
renovations. 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



$1,782,000 

Courthouse Construction Fund (see Comment No. 1) 

The Hall of Justice, which is located at 850 Bryant Street 
between 6 th and 7 th Streets, currently houses the Superior 
Court's Traffic Division and 22 courtrooms. The Superior 
Court's Traffic Division administers the adjudication of 
traffic citations including the processing of traffic citations 
and fine payments, referrals to public traffic school, and 
initiating or removing drivers license suspensions, 
according to Mr. Neal Taniguchi of the Superior Court. 
Mr. Taniguchi states that the Traffic Division uses two of 
the 22 courtrooms in the Hall of Justice as traffic hearing 
rooms (Traffic Hearing Room A and Traffic Hearing Room 
B), to hear traffic citation protests. The remaining 20 
courtrooms in the Hall of Justice are trial courtrooms. Mr. 
Taniguchi reports that the Traffic Division is located in 
approximately 8,200 square feet of space on the 1st floor of 
the Hall of Justice, and that the two traffic hearing rooms 
are located in approximately 2,900 square feet of space on 
the 2 nd floor of the Hall of Justice (an average of 1,450 
square feet per hearing room). 

Further, Mr. Taniguchi reports that the Superior Court is 
leasing approximately 6,050 square feet of space which is 
used for three auxiliary courtrooms at 575 Polk Street, in a 
building the Superior Court has been leasing since July of 
1991 (see Comment No. 3). According to Mr. Taniguchi, 
the Superior Court plans to relocate the Superior Court's 
Traffic Division, which, as noted above, has 8,200 square 
feet of space, and its two traffic court hearing rooms, which 
as noted above, has 2,900 square feet, or a total of 11,100 
square feet, from the Hall of Justice to the approximately 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



6,050 square feet of leased space at 575 Polk Street (see 
Comment No. 4). 

According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court is 
authorized to use the Courthouse Construction Fund to 
pay for (a) the annual debt service on the Civic Center 
Courthouse, which became operational in December of 
1997 and is located at the corner of McAllister and Polk 
Streets, (b) the annual cost of the leased facility at 575 
Polk Street, (c) property insurance costs, (d) capital 
improvements to courthouse facilities, and (e) bond trustee 
finance costs. 

According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court intends to 
expend the requested $1,782,000 in Courthouse 
Construction fund monies to pay for the following three 
renovation projects: 

1) $ 612.000 to renovate leased space at 575 Polk Street 
- 6,050 square feet of leased space, which is currently 
being used as three auxiliary trial courtrooms, would be 
converted from (a) two auxiliary trial court rooms, 
totaling approximately 4,033 square feet, to two traffic 
court hearing rooms (an average of 2,017 square feet 
per hearing room) and from (b) one auxiliary trial court 
room, totaling approximately 2,017 square feet, to office 
and public counter space, to accommodate the 
relocation of the Superior Court's Traffic Division. 
Attachment I is a memorandum from Mr. Taniguchi 
explaining how the Traffic Division, which now 
occupies 8,200 square feet in the Hall of Justice can be 
accommodated by 2,017 square feet at the leased Polk 
Street site. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior 
Court anticipates that construction work for this 
project would begin in the Fall of 2004 and be 
completed by the Fall of 2005. 

2) $670.000 to renovate City-owned space at the Hall of 
Justice - 2,900 square feet of space on the 2 nd floor of 
the Hall of Justice would be converted from two traffic 
hearing rooms, containing an average square feet of 
1,450 each (Traffic Hearing Room A and Traffic 
Hearing Room B), to one new 2,900 square foot trial 
courtroom, which would be used to accommodate 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

criminal trials. As previously noted, the Superior Court 
currently has 22 courtrooms at the Hall of Justice 
consisting of 20 trial courtrooms and two traffic hearing 
rooms. The subject renovation would result in a total of 
21 trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice. According to 
Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court anticipates that the 
construction work for this project would begin in the 
Fall of 2005 and be completed by the Spring of 2006. 

3) $500.000 for Hall of Justice Courtrooms - All 20 
trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice, totaling 
approximately 60,000 square feet, or an average of 
3,000 square feet per trial courtroom, would be 
renovated. Such renovations would include the 
refurbishing of jury boxes, witness stands, benches, and 
audience seating. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the 
Superior Court anticipates that the construction work 
for these renovations would begin in the Fall of 2004 
and be completed by the Spring of 2006. 

Budget: Attachment II provided by Mr. Taniguchi is a budget for 

the $1,782,000 requested supplemental appropriation 
including City project staff hours and hourly rates. 
According to Mr. Taniguchi, all of the renovation work, 
except for the design and engineering work and project 
management to be performed by the Department of Public 
Works, will be awarded on a competitive bid basis (see 
Comment No. 5). 

Comments: 1. The Courthouse Construction Fund was established for 

the purpose of receiving revenues from surcharges on civil 
and probate filing fees, and parking citations as follows: (1) 
limited jurisdiction cases, which are lawsuits under 
$25,000 - $10.00; (2) unlimited jurisdiction cases, which 
are lawsuits over $25,000 - $50.00; and (3) parking 
citations - $1.00. According to Mr. Taniguchi, as of 
February 4, 2004, the unappropriated balance in the 
Courthouse Construction Fund was $5,425,954. Approval 
of this subject request of $1,782,000 would result in an 
unappropriated fund balance of $3,643,954. 

2. Mr. Taniguchi states that the Superior Court currently 
has 59 trial courtrooms comprised of 20 trial courtrooms at 
the Hall of Justice, 36 trial courtrooms at the Civic Center 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

45 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Courthouse, and 3 auxiliary trial courtrooms at 575 Polk 
Street. After completion of the subject interior facilities 
renovation projects, Mr. Taniguchi reports that the 
Superior Court will have 57 trial courtrooms comprised of 
21 trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice and 36 trial 
courtrooms at the Civic Center Courthouse. 

3. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court is 
currently leasing a total of approximately 8,870 square 
feet of space, at approximately $2.15 per square foot per 
month, at 575 Polk Street, for a total rental cost per month 
of $19,101 ($229,212 annually), of which approximately 
6,050 square feet of space, as noted above, is used for three 
auxiliary trial courtrooms. The remaining 2,820 square 
feet is used as office space, jury deliberation room space, 
and juror and witness waiting room space. According to 
Mr. Taniguchi, one of the auxiliary trial courtrooms, 
totaling approximately 2,017 square feet, is currently 
being used as a temporary juvenile traffic hearing 
courtroom and two of the three auxiliary trial courtrooms, 
totaling approximately 4,033 square feet, is currently 
being used for overflow trial courtroom space, which is 
used when there are more trials than courtrooms available 
at the Civic Center Courthouse. According to Mr. 
Taniguchi, the Superior Court anticipates that the 
temporary juvenile traffic hearing room will be moved to 
Juvenile Hall prior to the commencement of the proposed 
subject renovation work at 575 Polk Street, and the two 
overflow trial courtrooms will be eliminated as a result of 
the proposed renovation project. 

4. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court plans to 
relocate the Traffic Division, including its administrative 
space and its two traffic hearing rooms, from the Hall of 
Justice to the leased facility at 575 Polk in order for the 
Hall of Justice facility to accommodate more criminal 
trials, by constructing one additional trial courtroom at the 
Hall of Justice. As stated on page 2 of Attachment III 
provided by Mr. Taniguchi, "The Court's recently adopted 
facilities master plan identified an existing and long-term 
shortage of criminal trial courtrooms in the Hall of Justice. 
Because of this shortage, criminal cases are often 
transferred from the Hall of Justice to the Civic Center 
Courthouse for trial, which causes delay, inefficiency, and 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

increased costs for both the City and the Superior Court. 
The Superior Court is therefore adding one new large trial 
courtroom to the Hall of Justice through the Hall of Justice 
renovation project to address the shortage problem." 

5. Mr. Taniguchi advises that, because 575 Polk Street is 
not a City-owned building, the normal City process for 
competitively selecting a contractor for the 575 Polk Street 
project does not apply, and the landlord is responsible for 
selecting the contractor. However, Mr. Taniguchi advises 
that the landlord is likely to use a competitive bidding 
process in selecting the contractor for renovations made at 
575 Polk Street. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a pohcy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

47 



Superior Court of California 

County of San Francisco 



Gordon Park-Li Neal I Taniguchi 

Chief Executive Officer Chief Fiscal Officer 



February 24, 2004 

TO: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst 

FROM: Neal Taniguchi, Superior Court 

RE: Courthouse Construction Fund Appropriation request 

Relocation of Traffic Division to 575 Polk Street 



You requested the Court to explain why it plans to move its Traffic Division from Room 101, at the Hall 
of Justice, which consists of approximately 8,200 square feet, to a smaller space at 575 Polk Street. 

The Superior Court's Traffic Division, which processes and adjudicates traffic citations, and other non- 
serious infractions, consists of 38.5 FTE positions, and currently shares Room 101, at the Hall of Justice 
with the Criminal Division, Clerk's Office (about 42 FTE). Because the Traffic Division currently shares 
Room 101 with the Criminal Division, the square footage, on a per FTE basis, is roughly the same as 
what the Traffic Division will occupy, once 575 Polk Street is renovated. 

The Court is simply attempting to more efficiently use its existing office space to accommodate the need 
for additional criminal courtrooms. 

If you should have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 



Gordon Park-Li 



400 McAllister Street - Room 205 

San Francisco, CA 94102-4514 

ntaniguchifoisftc . org 

48 



n l ia l iiiii c ii i ii 



Page 1 of 2 





E ra 


_> 


■* % 




5 o> 

D5 .£= 


"53 


1> S 


W 


TO C 


.> CL 




C C 


E 




c 


CD CD 


=S ° 


a 

E 


S Q. 


o 

ej 


CD r- 

0-g5 


c K 


cd 


E <m 


E 
o 
u 


O CD 

= -a 

O =3 

^ -7-; 


a ,i 

cd «- 





in 




C 




o 






CD 

u 


ra 

> 


"55 

-3 


o 
c 

CD 


"o 


E 




o 


"ra 


o 




3 




o 




o 



I is 

S 8 

^ o ° 

^ co n 

to m w 

< 5 ro 

O O "5 

m ca h- 



&e- &e &■> 



w "55 

o o 

a. E 

tn os 



CO 

< o 

= "<n 

E cu 



fe"> fee fee 



&=>&>&} 



en •= = 



fee fee- &e fee- 



CD o o 



CD o o 



fee fee fee fee 



O O CD 
CD CD CD 



t— CO CD 



fee fee fee fee 



-O _: 

. CD -^ 



c -^ en 

■2 |o 

.a c X3 

2 I § 

=3 O CD 

o — *- 
g ^ CO 

slf 

CD CT1 .Q 
CD~ .E= CD 

m ■■= £ 



O CD 3 
■-0-0 

§ 3 c? 

o m ra 

Eo w 53 

^ en a. 

5=9 en o 

.2 » xj 

en cd CD 

5 w "5 

ra o" — 

> r^ cd 

o co ~ 



p= in i2 



jg -iii r-_ 

en o °~ 

39 b B W 

"2 ° CD -= 

C= — •=- CD 



<2 o-> 
"33 .o 



O 



&L*6« 



O T3 

O 1= 

CD 

2 c 



s b= 



Q CL 



OJ. 



.9 E 



ra u_ g> ca 

S "" = S 

.Q CD CD S 

l i s> = 

o - .E m 

E E c 

CD 3 O 

Q U_ O 



CD -3 



— < 

o O 



a 


CD 


CD 


cd 


CO 

o 
3 
"O 

CD 


CD 
-O 


E 


a3 


o 

in 


CO 


£ 


CD 




a3 




CD 

cn 




?- 


■a 


5 




-Q 

2 


3 

a 


o 

a 


o 


o 


CD 



49 



Attacnmem i i 
Page 2 of 2 



u 








73 


ro 
DC 


-3 


> 






O 


73 




o 


ro 


rr 



■*(DO)O^OCO(D 

CDOON<M0D(0(D 
LOt- LO O CM CO CO OJ 

ro" to csT o o cnT co~ oo 

CNJ CM ■<— CO 

CM CM CO t- CM O 

co -3- cm a> r~~ oo 








n> 


C/J 


ro 




DC 


o 




0- 





O CO CM 
O O CO 



CN1 CM CO «- CM O 

(D ■* CN O) N CO 






cn o) t n t- o 
cm -a- r~- r~- co **■ 





< 




O 




1— 


CQ 




<*J 


CD 


< 


"ro 


en 


DC 


£ 


> 


o 





cotDcnncNoroin 
t- in tj- en o co 



-■3- CO CM 



CM CM CO t— CM O 

CO rf C\J O) N CO 



CO OO CO CO i— o 

»- ^ n s co v 



CD S O) 

i o iS „ is -g g 



J? ^= 5 .2 w 

: o < 



0J CD 



M ■— ^ 

TO o ^ 

ni ■— i— 



<u u o) c r 
C/3 < < < O 



B < 
s S 



5 b 

O h- 



50 



Page 1 of 2 



uperior Court of California 

County of San Francisco 



Gordon Park-Li Neal I Taniguchi 

Chief Executive Officer Chief Fiscal Officer 



January 21, 2004 

TO: Leanne Nhan, Analyst 

Budget Analyst's Office, Board of Supervisors 

FROM: Neal Taniguchi 

KE. Item 04-0002, Supplemeiilal Appropriation in ihe amount oi 31 ,782,000, from the 

Courthouse Construction Fund 

cc: Presiding Judge Donna Hitchens 

Gordon Park- Li, Chief Executive Officer 

In response to your information request regarding the proposed supplemental appropriation request from 
the Courthouse Construction Fund, you will find attached to this memo, all supporting documentation on 
the proposed projects. 

Background 

The Courthouse Construction Fund is a special fund created pursuant to State law. The Fund may only be 
used for the acquisition, rehabilitation,, construction, and financing of courtrooms and court facilities (GC 
Section 76100). Revenues appropnated to the Fund are derived from surcharges on civil filing fees and a 
surcharge on parking citations. In the past, the Fund was used to finance the construction of the Civic 
Center Courthouse, which opened to the public in December 1997. 

The current operating surplus, as of February 4, 2003, was $5,425,954. This proposed ordinance would 
appropriate $1,782,000 from that surplus. 



400 McAllister Street - Room 205 

San Francisco, CA 94102-4514 

ntaniguchi@sftc.org 

51 



n L l c u i i hi c i I i 11 

Page 2 of 2 



Budget 



The proposed uses of the fund are as follows: 



Estimated 
Project Cost 



1 . Interior Renovations - Hall of Justice, Traffic Hearing 
Rooms A&B. Both hearing rooms would he combined into one 
trial courtroom to accommodate additional criminal trials. This 
project would be implemented in conjunction with the relocation 
of the Court's Traffic Division to its leased 575 Polk Street 
facilities (see below). The Court's recently adopted facilities 
master plan identified an existing and long-term shortage of 
criminal trial courtrooms in the Hall of Justice. Because of this 
shortage, criminal cases are often transferred from the Hall of 
Justice to the Chic Center Courthouse for trial, which causes 
delay, inefficiency, and increased costs for both the City and 
County and ihe Superior Court. Fhe Superior Court is therefore 
adding one new large trial courtroom to the Hall of Justice 
through the Hall of Justice renovation project to address the 

shortage problem. $670,000 

2. Interior Renovations - Hall of Justice, various courtrooms. 

Jury boxes, witness stands, benches, and audience seating have 

not been refurbished in years, or in some cases, since the 

opening of the building . This proposed project would make 

improvements to the most dilapidated courtrooms. 500,000 

3. Interior Remodel - 575 Polk Street, leased facility. The Polk 

Street facility would be remodeled to accommodate the Traffic 
Division, which would be relocated from the Hall of Justice to 
provide space for additional trial court proceedings. 612.000 

TOTAL proposed expenditures SI, 782, 000 



52 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Item 5 - File 03-1640 

Department: 

Item: 



Location: 



Lessor: 



Concession 
Agreements: 



Lease Agreements: 



Airport Commission 

Resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the (a) 
existing Concession Agreements and separate Lease 
Agreements for Rental Car Operations between the City 
and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airport Commission and Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis 
Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, 
Inc., Dollar RentA-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A- 
Car Company of San Francisco, The Hertz Corporation, 
and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc.; and (b) existing 
Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations between the 
City and County of San Francisco acting by and through 
its Airport Commission and National Car Rental 
Systems, Inc 1 . 

The Rental Car Center north of the North Terminal at 
the San Francisco International Airport. 

City and County of San Francisco by and through the 
Airport Commission. 



The Board of Supervisors previously approved (File No. 
98-411) Concession Agreements between the Airport and 
seven rental car companies including Alamo, Avis, 
Budget, Dollar, Enterprise, Hertz, and Thrifty, for the 
five-year period from December 30, 1998 through 
December 29, 2003 and extended by the Airport, as 
provided for under the original Concession Agreements, 
for one five-year period from December 30, 2003 to 
December 29, 2008. The Concession Agreement between 
the Airport and National, as previously approved by the 
Board of Supervisors (File No. 98-411) for the same five- 
year period from December 30, 1998 through December 
29, 2003 was terminated in November of 2002 (see 
Comment No. 1). 

In addition to the Concession Agreements, the Board of 
Supervisors previously approved (File No. 98-411) Lease 
Agreements between the Airport and eight rental car 



1 ANC is the parent company of both Alamo Rent-a-Car and National Car Rental Systems, Inc. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Number of Square 
Feet: 



Term of Concession 
Agreements and 
Lease Agreements: 



Right of Renewal: 

Purpose of 
Amendment 
No. 1: 



companies including Alamo, Avis, Budget, Dollar, 
Enterprise, Hertz, National, and Thrifty, for the five-year 
period from December 30, 1998 through December 29, 
2003 and extended by the Airport, as provided for under 
the original Lease Agreements, for one five-year period 
from December 30, 2003 to December 29, 2008. 

According to Mr. David Dunn of the Airport, the 
Concession Agreements pertain to the Concession Fees 
which are paid by the rental car companies to the Airport, 
based on the higher of the Minimum Annual Guarantee 
or the percentage of gross revenues (see below), while the 
Lease Agreements pertain to rents paid by the rental car 
companies to the Airport for the space occupied by each 
rental car company at the Airport's Rental Car Center. 



As shown in Attachment I, provided by the Airport, the 
Lease Agreements provide for a total of 2,036,122 square 
feet. The Rental Car Center includes a five-story rental 
car garage, which accommodates 3,600 vehicles, a Quick 
Turnaround Area (QTA) where returned rental vehicles 
are cleaned and refueled (with a capacity for an 
additional 1,400 vehicles), and a surface storage area. 



The Airport has exercised, effective December 30, 2003, 
its five-year option to extend the term under the 
provisions of the existing five-year Concession 
Agreements and separate Lease Agreements, effective 
from December 30, 2003 through December 29, 2008, 
after the initial five-year term of the Concession 
Agreements and Lease Agreements expired on December 
29, 2003. 

None. 



The proposed Amendment No. 1 to the existing 
Concession Agreements and to the separate Lease 
Agreements, for the five-year period retroactive to 
December 30, 2003 through December 29, 2008, would (a) 
incorporate the requirements of the City's Minimum 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

54 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Compensation Ordinance and Health Care Accountability 
Ordinance (MCO/HCAO), (b) reduce by ten percent the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) under the 
Concession Agreements payable by the rental car 
companies to the Airport, (c) waive an increase in rent, 
under the Lease Agreements, payable by the rental car 
companies to the Airport (see Annual Rent Payable to the 
Airport below) and (d) adjust the threshold for abatement 
of the requirement to pay to the Airport the MAG during 
months of reduced deplaning passengers at the Airport, 
as further explained below. 



Annual Concession 
Fees Payable to the 
Airport by the 
Rental Car Companies 
Under the Existing 
Concession 

Agreements and Under 
the Proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to 
the Concession 
Agreements: 



As shown in Attachment I, provided by the Airport, under 
the existing Concession Agreements each of the rental car 
companies pays to the Airport an annual Concession Fee 
equal to the higher of either (a) ten percent of its annual 
gross revenues, or (b) a Minimum Annual Guarantee 
(MAG). 



As shown in Attachment I, the proposed Amendment No. 
1 to the Concession Agreements would reduce the MAG 
for each of the rental car companies by ten percent, or a 
total reduction of $2,254,700 from $22,546,998 to 
$20,292,298. 

Amendment No. 1 would also change the "MAG 
abatement" provision of the Concession Agreements, 
which provides MAG relief to the rental car companies. 
Under the existing Concession Agreements, during any 
month in which the number of deplaning passengers at 
the Airport is less than 75 percent of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996, the 
MAG is abated, and for that month, the rental car 
companies would pay a Concession Fee equal to 10 
percent of revenues regardless of whether that amount is 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

55 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

more than or less than the MAG. Amendment No. 1 
would change this provision so that during any month in 
which the number of deplaning passengers at the Airport 
is less than 70 percent, instead of 75 percent, of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996, the 
MAG would be abated and for that month the rental car 
companies would pay a Concession Fee equal to ten 
percent of revenues. Attachment III, provided by the 
Airport, states that "[i]f this percentage [70 percent] were 
in place today, the savings to the City in MAG 
abatements for calendar year 2003 alone would have been 
$1,121,231," meaning the Airport would have realized 
increased Concession revenues of $1,121,231, than if the 
threshold were 75 percent. 

Annual Rent Payable 

to the Airport 

By the Rental Car 

Companies Under 

the Exiting Lease 

Agreements and Under 

the Proposed 

Amendment No. 1 to 

the Lease Agreements: Attachment I, provided by the Airport, contains the 

annual rent payable by the rental car companies to the 
Airport for each rental car company under the existing 
Lease Agreements. According to Mr. Dunn, the 
"Structure Fee" in Attachment I is the rent paid by the 
rental car companies to the Airport for space within the 
building structure of the Rental Car Center, while the 
"Surface Fee" is the rent paid by the rental car companies 
to the Airport for space in the outside storage area of the 
Rental Car Center. 

Under the original Lease Agreements the rents payable to 
the Airport were to be increased at the start of the five- 
year extension term based on the current market value of 
unimproved land in the vicinity of the Airport. Based on 
this provision of the original Lease Agreements, the 
annual rents would have increased by 4.2 percent 
effective December 30, 2003. However, under the 
proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreements, the 
4.2 percent rent increase during the five-year extension 
term would be waived. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

56 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



According to Mr. Dunn, the reason for granting the rental 
car companies both a ten percent reduction in the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee (under the Concession 
Agreements) and a waiver of the 4.2 percent rent increase 
(under the Lease Agreements) is that this "would help to 
offset the costs incurred by complying with [the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance]." 

As shown in the table below, if the scheduled 4.2 percent 
rent increase is waived, the rental car companies would 
not have to pay the Airport an additional $489,355 in rent 
($12,043,390 less $11,554,035). 





Existing 

Rent 
(Annual) 


Rent After 
Increase 
(Annual) 


Rent Under 

Amendment 

No. 1 

(Annual) 


Alamo 

(ANC) 


$1,867,136 


$1,946,244 


$1,867,136 


National 
(ANC) 


1,335,595 


1,392,173 


1,335,595 


Avis 


2,308,141 


2,405,911 


2,308,141 


Budget 


897,833 


935,852 


897,833 


Dollar 


858,703 


895,077 


858,703 


Enterprise 


291,564 


303,921 


291,564 


Hertz 


3,672,007 


3,827,486 


3,672,007 


Thrifty 


323,056 


336,727 


323,056 


Total 


$11,554,035 


$12,043,390 


$11,554,035 



Attachment II, provided by the Airport, shows the gross 
revenues realized by each of the eight rental car 
companies as well as the details of the rents paid by the 
rental car companies to the Airport for the past five years. 
As shown in Attachment II, during the initial five-year 
term from December 30, 1998 through August of 2003, 
the rental car companies have paid to the Airport 
$136,712,785 in Concession Fees and $57,770,160 in rent, 
or a total of $194,482,945. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

57 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Utilities and 

Janitorial 

Services: 



Minimum 
Compensation 
Ordinance (MCO)/ 
Health Care 
Accountability 
Ordinance (HCAO) 
Requirement: 



As explained by the Airport in Attachment IV, the rental 
car companies pay for the utilities and janitorial services 
at the Rental Car Center, except for janitorial services in 
the public lobby and public restrooms, which are provided 
by the Airport. 



The existing Concession Agreements and Lease 
Agreements with the seven rental car companies, and the 
Lease Agreement with National Rent-A-Car, do not 
require the rental car companies to comply with the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and the Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance (MCO/HCAO), since these 
Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements were 
entered into prior to the adoption by the Board of 
Supervisors of those two ordinances. The proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and 
Lease Agreements would require the rental car 
companies to comply with the MCO/HCAO ordinances 
during the five-year extension period of these 
Agreements, from December 30, 2003 through December 
29, 2008. 



Ms. Cathy Widener of the Airport provided the 
memorandum shown as Attachment V to this report, 
which contains information provided by the Office of 
Contract Administration as to the requirements of the 
MCO/HCAO ordinances. 

As stated in Attachment IV, provided by the Airport, 
"[t]he Industry [i.e. the Rental Car Companies] 
unanimously agreed to comply with both ordinance [s] if 
the Airport 1) would keep the land portion of the rental 
rates at the current rates, and 2) reduce the current 
Minimum Annual Guarantees (MAGs) for each company 
by 10%. " 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

53 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. As previously noted, the proposed Amendment No. 1 

to the Concession Agreements would reduce the Minimum 
Annual Guarantee payable to the Airport by each of the 
rental car companies by ten percent or a total of 
$2,254,700 in reduced revenues to the Airport. Also as 
previously noted, the rent increase that would be waived 
by the Airport under the proposed Amendment No. 1 to 
the Lease Agreements totals $489,355. Considering both 
of these two revenue reductions, the Airport reports in 
Attachment IV that "[o]ver the five-year period, this 
would reduce the MAGs by $11,273,500 and it would 
reduce the land rent by $2,445,000," resulting in reduced 
payments being made by the rental car companies to the 
Airport. The Budget Analyst notes that the actual rent 
increase that would be waived under the proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreements over the five 
years is $2,446,775 ($489,355 times five) and not 
$2,445,000. Therefore, if this proposed resolution is 
approved, the total reduced payments to be made by the 
rental car companies to the Airport, over the five-year 
extension period retroactive to December 30, 2003 
through December 29, 2008, is $13,720,275 ($11,273,500 
plus $2,446,775). That amount of $13,720,275 would 
result in the Airport making reduced Annual Service 
Payments (15 percent of Concession revenues) to the 
City's General Fund by a total of $2,058,041, over the 
five-year period from December 30, 2003 through 
December 29, 2008, or an estimated General Fund 
revenue decrease of $411,608 annually over the five 
years. However, the $13,720,275 in reduced payments by 
the rental car companies to the Airport is based solely on 
the reduced MAG and waived rent increase. The 
adjustment to the "MAG abatement" threshold could 
partially offset that revenue reduction if it is applicable in 
a given year, which in calendar year 2003 would have 
produced $1,121,231 in additional revenue for the Airport, 
including $168,185 for the City's General Fund. 

2. As stated in Attachment VI, provided by the Airport, 
"[a]t the time the agreements were awarded, the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance ('MCO/HCAO') did not exist. 
The City Attorney's Office has advised staff that, as a 
legal matter, the MCO/HCAO do not apply to the 
Airport's mere exercise of the option to extend the term, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

59 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

unless the agreements are actually being amended or 
modified." Under the proposed Amendment No. 1, the 
Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements would 
incorporate the MCO/HCAO requirements, with which 
the rental car companies would be required to comply 
during the five-year option period (from December 30, 
2003 through December 29, 2008). As noted in 
Attachment IV, the Airport reports that "[t]he cost 
incurred by the rental car companies for this compliance 
over the same five-year period is [between] approximately 
$14.5 million and $16.5 million." 

However, Mr. Dunn reports that the Airport has not 
prepared any written analysis as to the reasonableness or 
accuracy pertaining to the estimated reported costs of 
between approximately $14.5 million and $16.5 million, 
which, according to the rental car companies, would be 
incurred by the rental car companies in order to comply 
with the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and 
the Health Care Accountability Ordinance. 

Recommendation: Because the proposed Amendment No. 1 to the 

Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements would, 
retroactive to December 30, 2003 through December 29, 
2008, reduce, by $13,720,275, the Concession Fees and 
rents payable by the rental car companies to the Airport, 
and because the Airport has not prepared any written 
analysis as to the reasonableness or accuracy pertaining 
to the reported costs which the rental car companies 
would incur by complying with the City's Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance and Health Care Accountability 
Ordinance, approval of the proposed resolution is a policy 
matter for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

60 




November 25, 2003 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



San Francisco international Airport 

Attachment 1 
Page 1 o f p £ Eox 8097 



San Francisco, CA S412S 
Tel 650.821.5000 
Fax 650.821.5005 
www.flysfo.com 



Subject: Amendment #1 - Rental Car Lease Agreements and Concession Agreements 
Background 

Dear Mr. Rose: 



AIRPORT 

toasHissiosi 

CITY AND COUNTY 
OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WILLIE L.BROWN, JR. 
MAYOR 

LARRY MAZZGLA 



,1ICXASL£. STRUMSKY 



!CE PRESIDENT 



JOHN L MARTIN 
AiRPGRT DIRECTOR 



The Airport Commission on March 3, 1997 awarded the agreements for rental car operations 
at the Airport. The teini of each agreement was for five years, cominonoing with the 
opening of the Rental Car Center, with one five-year option exercisable under the same 
terms and conditions at the sole discretion of the Airport Commission. The Rental Car 
Center opened for business on December 30, 1998. Therefore, the first five-year term is due 
to expire on December 29, 2003, at 1 1 :59 PM. The second five-year term will commence 
December 30, 2003 and expire December 29, 2008, at 11:59 PM. 

The on-Airport Rental Car Companies operate at the Airport under two agreements: 1) the 
Lease Agreement and 2) the Concession Agreement. The Lease Agreement pertains to the 
space occupied by each company at the Rental Car Center. The Concession Agreement 
pertains to the Concession Fee paid to the Airport. This fee is based on a Company's gross 
revenues. Each company pays either a Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) or ten-percent 
(10%) of gross revenues, whichever is greater. The original MAG was determined for each 
company by its original bid. The highest bidder had the opportunity to select its counter and 
ready stall locations. The space allocated to each company is based on Market Share. 

Attachment #1 reflects the current space occupied by each company and the annual rent paid 
for the space. It also shows the current rental rate versus a new rental rate reflecting the 
increase in the unimproved land portion of the facility. This increase will not occur, but will 
instead serve to help offset the costs incurred by the rental car companies to pay for 
additional benefits required by MCO/HCAO. (See attached.) 

The current Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) for each company is listed in the table 
below: 





Current MAG 


10% Reduction 


ANC (Original Alamo M^G) 


$3,751,000 


S375.100 


Avis 


5,818,000 


581,800 


Budget 


2,076,240 


207,624 


Dollar 


1.650,000 


165,000 


Enterprise 


501,641 


50.164 


Hertz 


8,122,900 


812.290 


Thrifty 


627,217 


62,722 


TOTAL 


522,546,998 


52.254,700 


t 


1 





Attachment I 

Mr. Harvey Rose Page 2 of 3 

November 25, 2003 
Page 2 



The current facility is approximately 2,117,380 square feet. The rental car facility has the 
capacity for 3,600 parked vehicles. The Quick Turn Around area (QTA) has the capacity for 
an additional 1,400 vehicles. 

As a result of the 10% MAG reduction, the Airport could collect $1 1,273,500 less for the 
five-year option period. However, once passenger traffic returns to the 1999-2000 levels, 
the rental car companies will be paying 10% of gross revenues, which could be greater than 
the MAG. The MAG is recalculated annually. MAGs can go up or down, based on a 
company's gross revenues, but they can never drop below the original bid. The current 
MAGs represent the original bids for all the companies, except Enterprise and Thrifty. 

Sincerely, 




David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Property Manager 

Revenue Development 

Attachment 

cc: David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



62 



Rental Car Facility Rent Comparison 

Atta chment 



TOTAL 



I 



STRUCTURE FEE 



Page 3 of 3 







Original 


New 


Company 


Square 
Feet 


$8.00 
per square foot 


$8.34 
per square foot 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


210,173 


$1,681,384.00 


$1,752,842.82 


149,512 


$1,196,096.00 


$1,246,930.08 


Avis 


257,672 


$2,061,376.00 


$2,148,984.48 


Budget 


99,155 


$793,240.00 


$826,952.70 


Dollar 


95,971 


$767,768.00 


$800,398.14 


Enterprise 


33,221 


$265,768.00 


$277,063.14 


Hertz 


404,079 


$3,232,632.00 


$3,370,018.86 


Thrifty 


34,761 


$278,088.00 


$289,906.74 



1,284,544| 



$10,276,352.00 



$10,713,096.96 



Difference 



$71,458.82 



$50,834.08 



$87,608.48 



$33,712.70 



$32,630.14 



$11,295.14 



$137,386.86 



$11,818.74 



$436,744.96 



SURFAGEFEE 



Company 


Square 
Feet 


$1.70 
per square foot 


$1.77 
per square foot 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


109,266 


$185,752.20 


$193,400.82 


82,058 


$139,498.60 


$145,242.66 


Avis 


145,156 


$246,765.20 


$256,926.12 


Budget 


61,525 


$104,592.50 


$108,899.25 


Dollar 


53,491 


$90,934.70 


$94,679.07 


Enterprise 


15,174 


$25,795.80 


$26,857.98 


Hertz 


258,456 


$439,375.20 


$457,467.12 


Thrifty 


26,452 


$44,968.40 


$46,820.04 




TOTAL 


751,578 


$1,277,682.60 


$1,330,293.06 



Difference 



$7,648.62 



$5,744.06 



$10,160.92 



$4,306.75 



$3,744.37 



$1,062.18 



$18,091.92 



$1,851.64 



$52,610.46 



STRUCTURE AND SURFACE FEES COMBINED 





Total 
Square Feet 


Total Original 
Fee Schedule 


Total New 
Fee Schedule 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


319,439 


$1,867,136.20 


$1,946,243.64 


231,570 


$1,335,594.60 


$1,392,172.74 


Avis 


402,828 


$2,308,141.20 


$2,405,910.60 


Budget 


160,680 


$897,832.50 


$935,851.95 


Dollar 


149,462 


$858,702.70 


$895,077.21 


Enterprise 


48,395 


$291,563.80 


$303,921.12 


Hertz 


662,535 


$3,672,007.20 


$3,827,485.98 


Thrifty 


61,213 


$323,056.40 


$336,726.78 










TOTAL 


2,036,122 


$11,554,034.60 


$12,043,390.02 



Difference 



$79,107.44 



$56,578.14 



$97,769.40 



$38,019.45 



$36,3/4.51 



$12,357.32 



$155,478.78 



$13,670.38 



$489,355.42 



X:\CDM\WRKFILES\DDUNN]\RCC\Rent Comparison.xls.xls - Sheet2 



63 



November 5, 2003 



San Francisco International Airport 

Attachment I I 

Page 1 of 2 

P.O. Box 8097 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

Tel 650.821.5000 

Fax 650.821.5005 

www.flysfo.com 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, C A 94102 

Subject: Amendment #1 - Five-Year Gross Revenues and Rents 



AIRPORT 

commission Dear Mr. Rose: 

CITY AND COUNTY 
OF SAN FRANCISCO 



WILLIE L. BROWN, JR. 
MAYOR 



LARRY MAZZOLA 
PRESIDENT 



MICHAEL S. STP.UNSKY 
VICE PRESIDENT 



LINDA S. CRAYTON 



ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L.MARTIN 
AIRPORT DIRECTOR 



Attached for your review is a list of the rental car companies located at the facility at the 
Airport, listing the monthly gross revenues and rent per company for the past five years. 
Please note that the information for 2003 is only available through August 2003. 

You will also notice that the revenues for National ceased in November 2002. ANC, the 
parent company for both the Alamo and National brands, filed Chapter 11 under 
bankruptcy protection in November 2001. Under this ruling the Court has the authority to 
allow the company in bankruptcy to assume or reject any or all or its agreements without 
the consent of the Airport. ANC chose to assume the Alamo Concession Agreement, which 
happened to be the greater of the two MAG amounts, and reject the National Concession 
Agreement. The ruling went into effect in November 2002. The gross revenues for both 
brands are reported by ANC under the original Alamo Concession Agreement. The result 
of ANC assuming both leases resulted in no facility rent loss by the Airport. 

Sincerely, 




David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Property Manager 

Revenue Development 



Attachment 



David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



64 



FIVE YEAR GROSS REVENUES/RENT 



Atta chine nt 1 1 



















Pa 


ge 


2 of 2 






{.COMPANY S 


■ ' ■■: 


1999 




200G 




2Q01 




2Q02 ;: 




2Q03 1 




TOTAL 


ALAMO 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 

$ 

$ 


40,301,986 
4,411,879 
1,867,136 


$ 
$ 

$ 


41,132,097 

4,570,341 
1,867,136 


$ 
$ 
$ 


28,210,751 
3,942,370 
1,867,136 


$ 
$ 


21,784,761 

3,669,097 
1,867,136 


$ 
$ 
$ 


23,784,817 
2,795,696 
1,867,136 


$ 

$ 

$ ! 


155,214,412 

19,389,383 
3,335,680.00 


AVIS 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


63,125,917 
6,613,240 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 

$ 


67,862,021 
6,995,156 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 
$ 


45,208,609 
5,878,779 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 
$ 


43,018,038 
5,877,571 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 
$ 


25,678,924 
3,891,444 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 
$ 


244,893,509 
29,256,190 
11,540,705 


BUDGET 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


27,495,174 

2,767,200 

897,832 


$ 
$ 

$ 


32,897,443 

3,296,660 

897,832 


$ 
$ 
$ 


23,775,307 

2,892,014 

897,832 


$ 
$ 


19,228,024 

2,447,420 

897,832 


$ 
$ 
$ 


12,684,573 

1,505,123 

897,832 


$ 

$ 
$ 


116,080,521 

12,908,417 

4,489,160 


DOLLAR 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


22,753,881 

2,419,527 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


22,856,891 

2,425,137 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


15,501,543 

2,013,850 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


15,176,148 

1,876,610 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


9,434,853 
1,19b,Ud'd 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


85,723,316 
9/J31.187 
4,293,510 


ENTERPRISE 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 

$ 


5,406,453 
553,252 
291,564 


$ 
$ 
$ 


6,103,654 
610,366 
291,564 


$ 
$ 
$ 


6,090,298 
627,417 
291,564 


$ 
$ 
$ 


5,901,667 
602,817 
291,564 


$ 
$ 
$ 


3,739,206 
402,247 
291,564 


$ 
$ 

$ 


27,241 ,278 
2,796,099 
1,457,820 


HERTZ 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


100,786,221 

10,104,996 

3,672,007 


$ 
$ 
$ 


112,611,142 

11,261,113 

3,672,007 


$ 
$ 
$ 


83,225,155 
9,769,012 
3,672,007 


$ 
$ 
$ 


76,661,900 
8,732,226 
3,672,007 


$ 
$ 
$ 


46,197,995 
5,579,543 
3,672,007 


$ 

$ 


419,482,413 
45,446,890 


NATIONAL 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
s 
$ 


34,627,987 
3,483,572 
1,335,594 


$ 

S 
$ 


32,906,892 
3,407,051 
1,335,594 




24,049,066 
2,876,738 
1,335,594 


$ 
$ 
$ 


15,462,887 
2,365,085 
1,335,594 


$ 

$ 


1,335,594 


$ 
$ 
$ 


107,046,832 

12,132,546 

6,677,970 


THRIFTY 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


7,261,244 
731,820 
323,056 


$ 
$ 

$ 


8,010,235 
809,765 
323,056 


$ 
$ 
$ 


6,355,427 
680,186 
323,056 


$ 


7,379,031 
759,076 
323,056 


$ 
$ 
$ 


5,077,764 
535,632 
323,056 


$ 
$ 
$ 


34,083,701 
3,516,479 
1,615,280 


IU jAL 

GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


301,758,863 
31,085,586 
11,554,032 


$ 
$ 
$ 


324,380,375 
34,711,183 
11,554,032 


$ 
$ 
$ 


232,416,156 
28,680,366 
11,554,032 


$ 
$ 
$ 


204,612,456 
26,329,902 
11,554,032 


$ 
$ 
$ 


174,167,766 
15,905,748 
11,554,032 


$1,237,335,616 
$ 136,712,785 
$ 57,770,160 



The revenues and rent for 2003 is only through August 2003 

National's MAG was rejected in November 2002. National revenues are included in Alamo 



X:\CDM\WP.KFILES\DDUNN\Five-yr Rev Analysis.xls.xls 



65 



Print Date: 11/3;:0O3 




San Francisco International Airport 

Attachment III 



November 13,2003 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
City & County of San Francisco 
1390 Market Street, Room 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



P.O. Box 8097 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

Tel 650.821.5000 

Fax 650.821.5005 

www.flysfo.com 



SUBJECT: Amendment #1 - Rental Car Leases/ Agreements- MAG Abatement 



AIRPORT 
COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY 
OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WILLIE L.BROWN, JR. 



LARRY MAZZOLA 
PRESIDENT 



MICHAEL S. STRUNSKY 
VICE PRESIDENT 



LINDA S.CRAYTON 



ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L.MARTIN 
AIRPORT DIRECTOR 



Dear Mr. Rose: 

As part of Amendment #1 of the Leases and Agreements, the rental car companies have 
agreed to a modification to the MAG adjustment mechanism. The Concession 
Agreements currently provide that the MAGs are abated whenever the number of 
deplaning passengers during the month is less than 75% of deplaning passengers for the 
same calendar month in the base year, which is 1996. Since the September 1 1 th disaster, 
the MAGs have been abated ten times given the reduction in passengers. Staff has 
negotiated that this provision be amended to provide that the MAGs be abated when the 
number of deplaning passengers during the month is less than 70% of the number of 
deplaning passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. Only five out of the ten 
times the MAGs have been abated did the number of deplaning passengers drop below 
70% of the same calendar month in 1996. If this percentage were in place today, the 
savings to the City in MAG abatements for calendar year 2003 alone would have been 
51,121,231. 

Approval of Amendment #1 to the rental car leases and agreements is critical to avoid 
such MAG abatements in the future. 

Sincerely, 



u 



David I. Dunn 

Senior Principal Property Manager 



Leo Fermin 
David Pfeiffer 

Peter Nardoza 



66 




November 18, 2003 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
City & County of San Francisco 
1390 Market Street, Room 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



San Francisco International Airport 

Attachment IV 
Page 1 of 2 

P.O. Box 8097 



San Francisco, CA 94128 
Tel 650.821.5000 
Fax 650.821.5005 
www.flysfo.com 



SUBJECT: Amendment #1 - Rental Car Leases/Asreements-Additional Information 



AIRPORT 
COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY 
O? SAN FRANCISCO 

WILLIE L.BROWN. JR. 
MAYOR 

LARRY MAZZOLA 
PRESIDENT 

MICHAELS. STRUNSKY 
VICE PRESIDENT 

LINDA S. CRAYTON 



ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L.MARTIN 
AIRPOtT OmiCTOR 



Dear Mr. Rose: 

As I previously stated in a letter dated October 31, 2003, Airport staff met with rental car 
industry representatives from the seven companies on several occasions prior to exercising 
the final Five-Year Option tn order to get their agreement to comply •with the Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance (MCO) and the Health Care Accountability Ordinance (HCAO). 
The Industry unanimously agreed to comply with both ordinance if the Airport 1) would 
keep the land portion of the rental rates at the current rates, and 2) reduce the current 
Minimum Annual Guarantees (MAGs) for each company by 10%. Under the current 
agreement, the City could adjust the land value portion of the rental rates to reflect the 
then-current market value of unimproved land in the vicinity of the Airport. Staff 
calculated the collective increase to be approximately S489,000. The combination of these 
two items would assist the rental car companies in offsetting costs incurred by the 
compliance of the Ordinances. 

The annual cost estimate to comply with MCO/HCAO received from each company is 
listed in the table below: 



ANC 1 


Between 5263,000 and 5424,000 


Avis 2 


Between S440,000 and S500.000 


Budget 


See Avis 


Dollar 3 


S213.000 


Enterprise 


Between 578,000 and SS5.000 


Hertz 


52.1 million 


Thrifty 


See Dollar 


TOTAL 


Between 52.9 million and 53.3 million 



1 Original Alamo MAG 

2 Combined with Budget because both companies are owned by Cendant 

3 Combined with Thrifty under the DTAG Group 



67 



Attachment IV 
Page 2 of 2 

Mr. Harvey Rose 

November 18, 2003 

Page 2 



The costs listed above are only estimates. The actual costs will not be determined until 
after the first year of compliance. 

In a previous letter dated November 12, 2003, 1 summarized the 10% reduction in current 
MAGs to be $2,254,700. This, accompanied with no increase to land rent equals 
approximately 52,743,700 annually, which would help to offset the costs incurred by 
complying with MCO/HCAO. Over the five-year option period, this would reduce the 
MAGs by SI 1,273,500 and it would reduce the land rent by 52,445,000. However, all 
companies would comply fully with MCO/HCAO. The cost incurred by the rental car 
companies for this compliance over the same five- year period is approximately SI 4.5 
million and $16.5 million. 

The rental car companies pay for all the utilities they use at the Facility. They are also 
responsible for all janitorial costs related to their tenant leasehold space. As is standard 
practice in all Airport Terminal areas, the Airport custodians clean the public lobby area 
and the public restrooms. 

Sincerely, 



David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Property Manager 

Revenue Development- 



Leo Fermin 
David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



68 




5an Frandsefi Jntefnational Atfport 

Attachment V 



To: Budget Analysts Office s 

Fr: Cathy Widener, SFO Governmental Affairs 
RE: Concession and Lease Agreements for Rental Car Operations 
MCO/HCAO Requirements 



Per you request for information regarding the MCO and HCO requirements triggered by the Rental 
Car Center Lease modification, please find information below taken directly from the Office of 
Contract Administration website ( http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/oca/lwlh.htm ). 

The Office of Contract Administration monitors these programs for the City. Please be advised that 
this information should not be attributed to me, but to the Office of Contract Administration. 

Minimum Compensation Ordinance (MCO) shall consist of the following: 

Hourly gross compensation in the amount of nine dollars ($9.00) per hour. 

In no less than twelve (12) nor more than eighteen (18) months from the Effective Date, the City 
shall increase the hourly gross compensation to ten dollars ($10.00) per hour; provided, however, 
that in the case of Nonprofit Corporations and public entities, this adjustment shall only be made if 
the Joint Report issued by the Controller, Mayor's Budget Office, and Budget Analyst, pursuant to 
San Francisco Administrative Code Section 3.6 finds that the City has sufficient funds to pay the 
anticipated costs of the adjustment. A finding of "sufficient funds" snail mean that the City wili not 
be required to reduce services in order to pay the anticipated costs of the adjustment. 

For each of the next three (3) years after the adjustment provided in Subsection (a)(ii) is made, at 
annual intervals, the City shall make an additional adjustment of 2.5%. 

The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to a written agreement (including, 
without limitation, any lease, concession, franchise or easement agreement) for the 
exclusive use of real property that is owned by the City or of which the City has 
exclusive use, if such property is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Airport 
Commission and the term of the agreement exceeds twenty-nine (29) days in any 
calendar year, whether by single or cumulative instruments. If cumulative 
instruments cause the term of the agreement to exceed twenty-nine (29) days, the 
agreement in question shall be subject to this Article only on and after the effective 
date of the instrument which causes the term to exceed twenty-nine (29) days. The 
requirements of this Chapter shall also apply to (i) any sublease or other agreement 
allowing other parties the exclusive right to occupy or use all or any portion of the 
property covered by the agreement and (ii) any agreement between a tenant or 



69 



Attachment V 
Page 2 of 3 



subtenant and any other person or entity to perform services on the airport property. 
Contractors who have agreements covered by this Section shall comply with the 
requirements of this Chapter insofar as they have "Covered Employees." For 
purposes of this Section, "Covered Employee" shall mean an employee who 
provides at least ten (10) hours of work on the property that is the subject of the 
agreement in a two-week Pay Period, adjusted proportionately if the Pay Period is 
other than two weeks. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section, all exemptions 
and waivers from the requirements of this Chapter that apply to Contracts shall also 
apply to agreements for the use of airport property described in this Section, except 
for the exemption in Subsection (xvii) relating to property contracts). Except as 
otherwise specifically provided, all requirements of this Chapter, and the monitoring 
and enforcement mechanisms provided in this Chapter, shall apply to agreements 
covered by this Section. 



Health Care Accountability Ordinance (HCAO): 

With respect to each Covered Employee who either resides in San Francisco (regardless of where 
the Covered Employee provides services) or provides services covered by this Chapter in San 
Francisco, each Contracting Party shall do one of the following, at the Contracting Party's option: 

(1) Offer to the Covered Employee health plan benefits that meet minimum 
standards prepared by the Health Director and approved by the Health 
Commission. The minimum standards shall provide for a maximum period for each 
Covered Employee's health benefits to become effective, not to exceed 30 days 
from the start of employment on a covered Contract, Subcontract, Lease or 
Sublease. The Health Commission shall review such standards every two years to 
ensure that the standards stay current with State and Federal regulations and 
existing health benefits practices; or 

(2) For each Week in which the Covered Employee works the applicable minimum 
number of hours set forth in Section 120.2.9(a) (definition of "Covered Employee"), 
pay to the City $1 .50 per hour for each hour the Covered Employee is employed by 
the Contracting Party on the Contract or Subcontract or on property covered by a 
Lease, but not to exceed $60 in any Week. The City shall appropriate money 
received pursuant to this Subsection (a)(2) for the use of the Department of Public 
Health. The Department of Public Health shall use the monies appropriated for 
staffing and other resources to provide medical care for the uninsured. The Health 
Commission may increase this hourly rate and Weekly maximum in accordance 
with the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Medical Care in the 
San Francisco Bay Area or such other factors as the Health Commission finds 
appropriate; provided, however, the Health Commission shall take this action no 
more than once a year and any adjustments in such hourly rate or Weekly 



70 



Attachment V 
Page 3 of 3 
maximum must be approved by the Board of Supervisors by resolution; or 

(3) Participate in a health benefits program developed by the Health Director in 
consultation with the Agency. The Health Director shall obtain Health Commission 
approval of the program before implementing it. The Health Director shall seek such 
approval within twelve (12) months after this Chapter is finally approved. Prior to 
implementation of the health benefits program provided in this Subsection (a)(3), 
each Contracting Party shall comply with Subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2). After the 
Health Director implements the program, in addition to the options provided in 
Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2), Contracting Parties may satisfy their obligations 
under this Chapter by complying with the requirements of the health benefits 
program. In developing the program, the Health Director shall (i) attempt to make 
health coverage available for uninsured Covered Employees and, if feasible, other 
uninsured City residents; (ii) use public health facilities to the maximum extent 
practicable; (iii) make the program economically viable; and (iv) provide a 
mechanism for funding which relies, as much as possible, on contributions by 
participating employers and employees. 



71 



n F rancisco international Airport 

Attachment y j. 
Page 1 of 3 



MEMORANDUM 

August 14, 2003 • 



TO: AIRPORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Larry Mazzola, President 

Hon. Michael S. Strunsky, Vice President 

Hon. Linda S. Crayton 

Hon. Caryl Ito 

Hon. Eleanor Johns 

FR.OM: Airport Director 

SUBJECT: Rental Car Operations at San Francisco International Airport 
Amendment to Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. ITO 
CONCESSION AGREEMENTS AND LEASE AGREEMENTS FOR RENTAL CAR 
OPERATIONS AT SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

Executive Summary 

On May 12, 2003, the Commission exercised the five-year option on the rental car leases, 
which currently do not contain City requirements regarding the Minimum Compensation 
Ordinance and Health Care Accountability Ordinance ("MCO/HCO"). The attached 
resolutions incorporate MCO/HCO requirements, waive the land rent adjustment, reduce the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee ("MAG") by 10%, and adjust the MAG abatement trigger. 

Background 

By Resolution Nos. 97-0052 through Resolution Nos. 97-0059, the Commission awarded 
eight (8) Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for Rental Car Operations at the 
San Francisco International Airport to Alamo, Avis, Budget, Dollar, Enterprise, Hertz, 
National and Thrifty. 1 

Under the Concession Agreements, each of the rental car companies pays to the Airport an 
annual Concession Fee equal to the higher often percent (10%) of its annual gross revenues 
and a Minimum Annual Guarantee. Under the Lease Agreements, the rental car companies 
pay rent based on the value of the land and cost recovery of the facility. The base term-was 



As part of the Alamo/National bankruptcy, the National Concession Agreement has since been terminated. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 
72 



Attachment V.I 
w u a ■ »r Page 2 of 3 

Members, Airport Commission 3 

August 14, 2003 
Page 2 



five years, commencing December 30, 1998, and the Commission has one five-year option 
to extend the term, exercisable at the sole discretion of the Commission. The Lease 
Agreements provide that the land value portion of the rent is adjusted to market value if the 
Airport exercises the term extension option. 

By Airport Commission Resolution No. 03-0075, the Commission exercised the Airport's 
option to extend the term of the agreements for an additional five-year period. The option 
period is scheduled to commence December 30, 2003. 

At the time the agreements were awarded, the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance 
and Health Care Accountability Ordinance ("MCO/HCAO") did nut exist. The City 
Attorney's Office has advised staff that, as a legal matter, the MCO/HCAO do not apply to 
the Airport's mere exercise of the option to extend the term, unless the agreements are 
actually being amended or modified. The City desires to have the rental car companies 
comply with MCO/HCAO, so staff met with the rental car companies to discuss their 
compliance with these ordinances. 

Proposal 

Given the City's desire to require MCO/HCAO compliance, the rental car companies and 
staff have negotiated an amendment to the agreements summarized as follows: 

1) MAG Reduction . To offset the financial costs of compliance with these Ordinances, 
the rental car companies requested a ten-percent (10%) reduction of their current MAGs. 
The current Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) for each company is listed in the table 
below: 



ANC* 




$ 


3,751,000 


Avis 




$ 


5,818,000 


Budget 




S 


2,076,240 


Dollar 




$ 


1,650,000 


Enterprise 




s 


501,641 


Hertz 




$ 


8,122,900 


Thrifty 




$ 


627,217 




TOTAL 


s 


22,546,998 


* Original Alamo MAG 






No Adjustment to Lease Rent. 


The rental car con 



2) 

rental rates at the Facility remain at the current rental rates. With the MAG reduction and no 
increase to the rental rates, the rental car companies could offset their costs of compliance 
with the Ordinances. 

3) Adjustment to Minimum Annual Guarantee Abatement Mechanism . The 

Concession Agreements currently provide that the MAGs are abated whenever the number 
of deplaning passengers during the month is less than 75% of the number of deplaning 

73 



Attachment , vl 

Members, Airport Commission P 3 g e 3 of 3 

August 14, 2003 

Paee3 



passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. Since the September 1 l lh disaster, the 
MAGs have been abated nine times given the reduction in passengers. Staff has negotiated 
that this provision be amended to provide that the MAG be abated when the number of 
deplaning passengers during the month is less than 70% of the number of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. 

4) MCO/HCAO . The rental car companies will comply with the MCO/HCAO. 

Recommendation 

I, therefore, recommend the approval of the Amendment No. 1 to Concession Agreements 
ua<l Lease Agreements. 




John 

Airport Director 

Prepared by: Leo Fermin 



74 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 6- File 03-1826 



Department: 
Item: 



Purpose of Lease 
Amendment: 



Lessor: 



Lessee: 



Airport 

Resolution approving Amendment No. 3 of an existing 
lease between the City and Travelex America, Inc. for 
Foreign Currency Exchange in the International 
Terminal and Domestic Terminal Buildings at the 
Airport. 



To amend the rent structure based on the terms set 
forth in this proposed Third Amendment. The existing 
lease provides for a total of approximately 1,229 square 
fgot qt s^ace to Travelex America Inc 



L O. V CiC 



x) to 



operate foreign currency exchanges at the Airport. 

City and County of San Francisco acting by and through 
the Airport Commission 

Travelex America, Inc. 



Existing and 
Proposed Terms 
of Lease: 



Rent Paid by 
Travelex Under the 
Existing Lease: 



The existing lease is for a term of five years, 
commencing December 10, 2000 and ending 
December 9, 2005. The term of the lease would not 
change under the proposed Amendment No. 3. 

The existing lease requires Travelex to pay the 
Airport the greater of a Minimum Annual Guarantee 
(MAG) of $4,127,500 annually or a passenger-based 
fee of $0.88 multiplied by the number of international 
passenger enplanements (the total number of 
passengers boarding airline carriers for international 
flights). 

The original lease was awarded to Travelex on 
December 21, 1999, based on a competitive bid. Under 
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, the Airport Concession 
Support Program was previously approved by the Board 
of Supervisors in August of 2002, wherein the original 
MAG of $4,127,500 was suspended (retroactive to 
September 11, 2001 through December 31, 2002) and 
instead, Travelex was authorized to pay the Airport 
$0.88 per enplaned international passenger, as specified 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

75 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



in the lease. Under the previously approved Amendment 
Nos. 1 and 2, the MAG of $4,127,500 was to be 
reinstated January 1, 2003. 

Total rent paid by Travelex to the Airport between the 
years 2000 and 2003, as reported by the Airport, was 
$10,323,487, as follows: 

Table 1 



Rents to be Paid by 
Travelex Under the 
Proposed Amendment 
No. 3: 



Year 



MAG 



Total 

Annual Total Rent 

Passenger Paid to 

Enplanements Airport 



2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 



500 



4,127,500 



3,788,066 
3,648,945 
3,306,045 



3,176,962 
2,774,926 
4,127,500 



Total 



$8,255,000 14,822,338 



$10,323,487 



Under the proposed Amendment No. 3, the proposed 
MAG would be reduced by 15 percent or by $619,125 
from $4,127,500 to $3,508,375 and the annual rent 
to be paid by Travelex to the Airport would be the 
greater of the reduced MAG of $3,508,375 or $0.88 
multiplied by the number of international passenger 
enplanements, retroactive to January 1, 2003 
through December 31, 2003. The original MAG of 
$4,127,500 would be reinstated effective January 1, 
2004. The Airport reports that, based on the number 
passenger enplanements of 3,306,045 for 2003, the 
rent would be $2,909,320, which is less than the 
MAG of $3,508,375. Therefore, the MAG of 
$3,508,375 would be paid by Travelex to the Airport 
for calendar year 2003 if the proposed Amendment 
No. 3 is approved. 



Utilities and 
Janitorial Service: 



Provided by Lessee. 



1 According to Mr. David Pfeiffer of the Airport, the full MAG of $4,127,500 was not paid in 2000 
because the lease began December 10, 2000, and Travelex held the lease for less than one month in 
2000. 

2 The MAG was suspended retroactive to September 11, 2001 under the Airport Concession Support 
Program (CSP), previously approved by the Board of Supervisors in August of 2002 (File No. 02-1230). 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

76 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



1. According to Mr. David Pfeiffer of the Airport, 
Travelex has already paid the Airport the full MAG of 
$4,127,500 in rent for calendar year 2003. However, Mr. 
Pfeiffer reports that based on the combined effects of the 
event of September 11, 2001, the SARS epidemic, the 
war in Iraq and the resulting decrease in international 
enplaning passengers in 2003, as compared to 2002, 
Travelex has requested a 15 percent reduction of the 
MAG in 2003, which, if approved, would result in a 
reimbursement of $619,125 by the Airport to Travelex. 
In the Attachment, a memo provided by the Airport, Mr. 
Pfeiffer provides additional information pertaining to 
the request by Travelex to pay reduced rent to the 
Airport. 

2. Mr. Pfeiffer reports in the attached memorandum 
that "As calendar year 2003 drew to a close, Travelex 
realized that it stood to lose $1.8M on the SFO 
operation. Citing the combined effects of 9/11, SARS, 
the war in Iraq, and the resulting decrease in 
international enplaning passengers, in September 2003, 
Travelex requested a retroactive 15% MAG reduction 
from the Airport. On October 8, 2003, the Airport 
Commission approved the reduction contingent upon the 
Board of Supervisors' approval, and on October 24, 2003, 
the Airport Commission Secretary forwarded the 
Amendment to the Board of Supervisors for approval." 

Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter 
for the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

77 



San Francisco International Airport 



February 10, 2004 



P.O. Box 8097 
San Francisco, CA 94128 
Tel 650.821.5000 
Fax 650.821.5005 

www.flysfo.com 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



AIRPORT 

COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY 

OF SAN FRANCISCO 

GAVIN NEWSOM 
MAYOR 

LARRY MAZZOLA 



MICHAEL S. STRUNSKY 
VICE PRESIDENT 



LINDA S.CRAYTON 



ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L. MARTIN 
AIRPORT DIRECTOR 



Subject: Amendment No. 3 to the Travelex Foreign Currency Exchange in the 
New International Terminal Building an Existing Terminal Buildings 
Lease No. 99-0449 at San Francisco International Airport 

Dear Mr. Rose: 

This responds to your request for additional information regarding Amendment No. 3 to 
the Travelex Foreign Currency Exchange Lease No. 99-0449 at the San Francisco 
International Airport. 

As calendar year 2003 drew to a close, Travelex realized that it stood to lose S1.8M on 
the SFO operation. Citing the combined effects of 9/1 1, SARS, the war in Iraq, and the 
resulting decrease in international enplaning passengers, in September 2003, Travelex 
requested a retroactive 15% MAG reduction from the Airport. On October 8, 2003, the 
Airport Commission approved the reduction contingent upon the Board of Supervisors' 
approval, and on October 24, 2003, the Airport Commission Secretary forwarded the 
Amendment to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 

As indicated in the spreadsheet previously transmitted to you office, Travelex met its 
rent obligation to the Airport for calendar year 2003 and paid the requisite MAG in the 
amount of $4, 127,500. 

Travelex has not made any specific statements with regard to what would occur if the 
15% reduction of the MAG for calendar year 2003 were not approved. However, 
Travelex has indicated that its two largest operating costs are rent and payroll which 
infers that if no rent reduction is approved then payroll costs would necessarily be cut. 
Because Travelex has multiple facilities manned approximately 16 hours per day, a 
reduction in staff could result in a degradation of customer service. 

The Airport expects that Travelex will request a change in how their foreign currency 
exchange rates are set pursuant to the Lease. If the Airport Commission approves this 
change to the Lease, Board of Supervisor approval would be sought. These changes to 
the spreads will not reduce the $4,127,500 MAG Travelex will pay as rent to the 
Airport in calendar year 2004. 78 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
February 10, 2004 
Page 2 



If you have questions, or require additional information, please contact me at 650-821- 
4500. 

c 




W. Pfeif 
Associate Denuty Director 
Revenue Development 



Patty Maitland 
Jema Turk 



79 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Item 7 - File 03-1964 
Department: 

Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 

Description: 



Superior Court 
Public Defender 

Hearing to consider the release of $3,597,426 previously 
reserved by the Board of Supervisors in the FY 2003-2004 
budget. 

$3,597,426 

General Fund monies previously appropriated and 
reserved by the Board of Supervisors in the FY 2003-2004 
budget, as recommended by the Budget Committee. 

Currently, the Public Defender requires that indigent 
defendants represented by the Public Defender's Office 
report their financial condition through a Declaration of 
Financial Conditions form. The Public Defender refers 
indigent defense cases to the Superior Court's Indigent 
Defense Program when (a) the Public Defender 
determines that a conflict of interest would result if the 
Public Defender were to serve as the defense attorney or 
(b) if the Public Defender is unable to handle the case 
with existing staff. The Superior Court then appoints a 
conflicts attorney from a panel of private attorneys 
recruited by the Bar Association, to represent and defend 
the indigent defendant in Superior Court through the 
Indigent Defense Program. 

In the FY 2003-2004 budget, the Board of Supervisors 
placed a reserve of $3,597,426 on the $7,238,801 amount 
appropriated to the Superior Court for the Indigent 
Defense Program, pending the development of means 
testing and/or the implementation of a registration fee, 
wherein fees would be charged to the defendant to recover 
the costs of criminal defense. As stated in a memorandum 
(Attachment I) from Mr. Neal Taniguchi of the Superior 
Court, "Means testing involves evaluating whether or not 
a defendant is truly 'indigent' and cannot afford an 
attorney to represent them. The evaluation may include a 
review of their financial and credit records, bank 
accounts, and employment status. Such an evaluation 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

80 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Special Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

would determine whether the defendant actually qualifies 
for free legal representation by the Public Defender or 
conflicts attorney under the Indigent Defense Program." 

The Superior Court is now requesting the release of the 
$3,597,426, which was placed on reserve by the Board of 
Supervisors in the FY 2003-2004 budget. Attachment II 
provided by Mr. Taniguchi contains a budget for the 
subject $3,597,426 in reserved funds. 

Comments: 1. Attachment I explains why the Superior Court did not 

develop or implement a means testing program for the 
Indigent Defense Program. Attachment I states that, "In 
a previous study, conducted by the Controller's 
Office... means testing was found to be not cost beneficial." 
According to Ms. Peg Stevenson of the Controller's Office, 
the Controller's Office concludes that the implementation 
of means testing and/or the assessment of registration 
fees would not be cost beneficial to the City. 

2. The Superior Court's Indigent Defense Program 
budgeted expenditures for FY 2003-2004 is $7,238,801!. 
According to Mr. Taniguchi, of the $7,238,801 budgeted 
for the Indigent Defense Program for FY 2003-2004, 
$3,823,448 has been incurred as of December 24, 2003 as 
detailed in Attachment II. According to Mr. Taniguchi, of 
the $3,823,448 incurred as of December 24, 2003, 
approximately $3,641,365 was paid for with funds 
previously appropriated by the Board of Supervisors from 
the Indigent Defense Program account and $182,083 was 
transferred from other accounts within the Superior 
Court's budget, to be reimbursed by the subject requested 
release of funds. 

3. As of the writing of this report, the Superior Court was 
unable to provide to the Budget Analyst with either (a) 
the total projected FY 2003-2004 costs of the Indigent 
Defense Program, or (b) the total projected FY 2003-2004 
caseload of the Indigent Defense Program. 



1 This amount includes a $43,949 Grand Jury budget which consists of Grand Jury expenses and 
compensation for Grand Jury members according to Mr. Taniguchi. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

81 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 1, 2004 Special Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



However, Mr. Taniguchi reports that the average monthly 
caseload and the average monthly expenditure through 
December 31, 2003 for the Indigent Defense Program is 
685 cases and $651,144, respectively. Therefore, based on 
this historical rate of expenditures, the Budget Analyst 
estimates that the annual caseload for FY 2003-2004 
would be approximately 8,220 (685 cases x 12 months) 
and the annual expenditure for FY 2003-2004 would be 
$7,813,728 ($651,144 x 12 months). The estimated annual 
expenditure of $7,813,728 for FY 2003-2004, is $574,927 
more than the $7,238,801 which was budgeted for the 
Indigent Defense Program in FY 2003-2004, as shown in 
the table below. 



FY 2003-2004 
Budget 



Amount 
Expended from 
7/1/03 through 

12/31/03 
(six months) 



Total 

Estimated FY Surplus/ (Deficit) 

2003-2004 Compared to FY 

Expenditures 2003-2004 Budget 



Indigent Defense Program 
Expenditures 



Recommendation: 



$7,238,801 



$3,906,864 $7,813,728 



$ (574,927) 



According to Mr. Todd Rydstrom of the Controller's Office, 
the Controller's Six Month Budget Status Report will 
project a net deficit of approximately $520,000, comprised 
of a deficit of approximately $600,000 for Indigent 
Defense, offset by approximately $80,000 in excess salary 
savings. Mr. Taniguchi states that he agrees with the 
Budget Analyst's and Controller's projected deficits based 
on year-to-date actual expenditures. 

Because both the Budget Analyst and the Controller 
project deficits in FY 2003-2004 expenditures for the 
Indigent Defense Program over and above the amount 
appropriated, including the reserved funds of $3,597,426, 
approve the requested release of reserved funds. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

82 



Attachment I 
Page 1 of 2 



Superior Court of California 

County of San Francisco 



Gordon Park-Li Neal I Taniguchi 

Chief Executive Officer Chief Fiscal Officer 



December 19, 2003 
TO: Leanne Nhan, Budget Analyst's Office, Board of Supervisors 

FROM: Neal Taniguchi, Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco 

RE: Request to release reserve of $3,597,426 from indigent defense appropriation 



The Budget Analyst has requested the following memorandum that explains why the Superior Court did 
not develop or implement a means testing program in the indigent defense program, which the Budget 
Committee specified as a condition for the release of the reserved funds. 

Means testing involves evaluating whether or not a defendant is truly "indigent" and cannot afford an 
attorney to represent them. The evaluation may include a review of their financial and credit records, 
bank accounts, and employment status. Such an evaluation would determine whether the defendant 
actually qualifies for free legal representation by a Public Defender or conflicts attorney under the 
Indigent Defense Program." 

The Superior Court did not develop a program for the following reasons: 

1. In a previous study, conducted by the Controller's Office, with the cooperation of the Court, 
the Public Defender, the Mayor's Office, the Treasurer's Bureau of Delinquent Revenue, and 
the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF), means testing was found to be not cost 
beneficial. With all of the issues surrounding the Public Defender's budget, the City's budget 
deficit, the findings of this study never surfaced during the budget hearings. 

2. Only approximately 20-25% of indigent defense cases are represented by the City's conflicts 
panel, while the remaining 75% to 80% of criminal indigent defense cases are represented by 
the Public Defender's Office. The Superior Court could not implement a means testing 
program for indigent defense without the same program applying to defendants represented 
by the Public Defender. 

3. By State law, the County is responsible for the administration of indigent defense programs, 
including means testing. The Superior Court is not authorized by State Rules of Court or 
State law to spend state funding on indigent defense administration. Since no local funding 
was appropriated to fund a means testing program, the Court did not implement the requested 
program. 



400 McAllister Street - Room 205 
San Francisco, CA 94102-4514 

ntanis!uchi(a).sftc.orc 
= 83 



Attachment 1 
Page 2 of 2 



Nevertheless, the Court is working cooperatively with the City, the BASF, and the Public Defender's 
Office to improve the administration of indigent defense. The Court is working with the BASF and the 
Public Defender to revise the Declaration of Financial Condition form and to develop a uniform set of 
guidelines to determine the eligibility for appointment of indigent defense counsel. 



84 



Attachment II 
Page 1 of 1 

















f 


c 

< 












1 
< 




llll 


1 


DD 










E 


E 
1 

Q, 


! 


s. 




neqotlated fee for Bar Association 
City's cost of replacing fees and comps 
database 

Grand jury fee on per meeting basts 


Q- 




E 1 Ei E E 1 E 




< ^ 


: < < 


< 


< 
















o 5 

ll 

in 3 
UJ ffl 


I 










o 
o 
o 
o 




O 

o 














1 1 
o S 














i 


ri °* **"" 

^ n s 




"O 














Q 
1- 
>- 


3 
C 

a 
a 

UJ 


s 


■ 


I 




bfi 




s 




II 


IsS 


o 


| 




o to 






o_ 


£ 


o" 






oo in 


2 


eo n a 

5 ?* -S 














Q 
1- 
>- 






ro 


d 




CO 








oo . 


■*■ 


° 






w m 






" 


r*- 


"" 






10 




c 

o 














"n 

m 


a 

3 

o. 










o 




™ 














o o 
^r in 






o 

o 


o 


§ 




t^> 


' 


4 O 


s 


If 1 














o tj 

>• < 


1 


5 


i 


o 




6_ 




o_ 




I 


QSjSis 


' 




°" s 






12 


E 


1 




s 




a o 
r pi 


o 


*T c 

GO „, 














o re 

> < 


! 




s 


o 




s 




5 




!- 


^ m s 


! 












■3 


S 


s 




! 




a 




a 

03 

■6 














o — 

i = 

m 


c 
u. 














































a" 


CD 

4A 


In ^ 

to &■ 

° n 

S 


■ 

E 

o 

u 



z> 
o 

o 

CD 
Q 

C/} 


O 
(£ 
O 

C 
nj 

U- 
C 
(/ 

O 
> 

= 



u 


re 
ra 
Q 
a 
i/> 
c 

QJ 

ai 
Q 

< c 

<U 

n 
■a 
c 


2 

TO 

Q 
a> 

s 

c 
a> 
o 

X 

Li. 
-» 
O 

s 

• 

n 

o 
a 
<n 

>- 

LL 




C 
- 

E 

a 
a 
C 

c 

T 

1 

I 
I 


. 


« 

c 

3 
O 

o 

c 
o 

o 

o 

c 

i 

0. 


c 

= ' 

C' -{ 


z 

i 


I 

c 
<r 




!/ 




c 
I 




c 5 

E £ 

o a 
ll" 


c £ 

ill 

<5> 3 i 



E 

1 

i 

I 
E 

CL 


a 




1 = 

- 

c 



u 

I- 


D 

u 

■o 
c 

e 
_c 

S 

> 

c 



i 

: 
n 




j 




LL 

a 




2 
c7 


c 

ra - ^- 
O 

= 5 

c 75 
a "° 

§ E 

§s 

< = 

< 0J 

■CQ:U_ 


D 

= 
B 

i 

a 

E 

9> 
C 

5 \ 

* \ 
I * 

= c 


c 

u 

- £ 

C 


' 1 

CD 
& O 

5 = 

— -o o S2 
a> C £ o 
a> n n .2 

I s " « 

CO o| ~ a 
C" = o to 
^ £ -a ]~ 

<s i| i a* 

;< il 15 f £ 
i— 2 > . t 



85 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 8 - File 03 - 1977 

Department: Recreation and Parks Department (RPD) 



Item: 



Purpose of the 

Proposed 

Amendment: 



Resolution approving and authorizing an amendment to 
the Master Tournament Agreement between the 
Professional Golfers' Association (PGA) Tour, Inc. and the 
RPD, for the use of Harding Park Golf Course for the PGA 
Tour Championship Tournament. 

In April of 2002, the Board of Supervisors approved a 
resolution approving and authorizing a Master 
Tournament Agreement (Agreement) between the 
Professional Golfers' Association (PGA) Tour, Inc. and the 
City, acting by and through the RPD Commission, for the 
use of Harding Park Golf Course for the PGA Tour 
Championship events. Under the terms of the existing 
Agreement, the PGA was to hold the PGA Tour 
Championship Tournament at Harding Park Golf Course 
three times over a nine-year period commencing on 
January 1, 2006. 

Subsequently, the PGA decided to also negotiate 
additional PGA Tour Championship Tournaments at East 
Lake Golf Course in Atlanta, Georgia. According to Mr. 
Michael Cohen of the City Attorney's Office, because the 
PGA's potential arrangement with East Lake Golf Course 
could conflict with the PGA's obligations to the RPD 
under the existing Agreement, the PGA approached the 
City and requested that the Master Tournament 
Agreement be renegotiated. This proposed amendment to 
the Master Tournament Agreement provides for the use of 
Harding Park Golf Course, for any of three different PGA 
Tournaments, either the PGA Tour Championship 
Tournament, the American Express Championship 
Tournament or the NEC Invitational Tournament, for a 
total of five tournaments to be held over a 15-year period 
commencing in 2005. Attachment I to this report is a 
memorandum from Ms. Jaci Fong of RPD describing the 
background and key provisions of the proposed 
amendment to the Master Tournament Agreement. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

86 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Term of the 
Amended Agreement: 



The existing Agreement between the RPD and the PGA 
was executed on April 19, 2002. The initial term of the 
existing Agreement was to end on the occasion of the 
third PGA Tour Championship Tournament at Harding 
Park Golf Course, but no later than December 31, 2015. 



Kight of Kenewal: 



Amount Payable by 
the PGA to the City: 



The proposed amendment to the existing Agreement 
would be executed on approval by the Board of 
Supervisors and the initial term would end after five PGA 
Tournaments are held within a 15-year period, 
commencing in 2005 and ending no later than December 
31, 2020. 

Three, nine-year extensions were authorized under the 
existing Agreement. The proposed amendment does not 
change such Right of Renewal provisions. 

Attachment II to this report, provided by Ms. Fong, is a 
comparison of the current financial terms under the 
existing Agreement with the financial terms of the 
proposed amendment. 

The existing and proposed amended payment provisions 
requiring payments by the PGA to the City are 
summarized below: 

• Existing Use Fee and Other Payments : For each 
Tour Championship Tournament held at Harding Park 
Golf Course, the PGA is to pay an up-front Use Fee of 
$250,000. Additionally, the PGA is to pay the City up 
to $130,000 as a reimbursement for any costs incurred 
by the City in excess of the $250,000 Use Fee. 
Proposed Use Fee and Other Payments : Under 
the proposed amendment, for each PGA Tournament 
held at Harding Park Golf Course, the PGA is to pay 
the City an up-front Use Fee of $500,000. However, 
the PGA would not pay for any costs incurred by the 
City in excess of the $500,000 Use Fee. 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

87 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



PGA Payments Under Existing Agreement to 
First Tee Program 1 : The existing Agreement 
required the PGA to pay a "Phase 1" payment to the 
First Tee Program of $250,000 per Tour Championship 
Tournament and up to an additional "Phase 2" 
payment to the First Tee Program of $250,000 from 
net income from the tournament event, if such net 
income were to be realized by the PGA. 
PGA Payments Under the Proposed Amendment 
to the First Tee Program: Under the proposed 
amendment, the PGA is to pay $500,000 to the First 
Tee Program for each of the five Proposed 
Tournaments to be held at Harding Park Golf Course 
regardless of the net income realized by the PGA for 
the tournament event. 

PGA Payment for Improvements Under Existing 
Agreement : The PGA was to pay the City $250,000 as 
a one-time contribution to the improvement of the 
Harding Park Golf Course. 

PGA Payments for Improvements to Harding 
Park Golf Course and future City Golf Course 
Improvements Under the Proposed Amendment : 
The PGA is to pay the City $100,000 to defray the 
design costs for the new Clubhouse to be built at the 
Harding Park Golf Course and is to contribute design 
services, which are valued by the RPD at an estimated 
$1,000,000, for the renovation of the City-owned 
Lincoln Park Golf Course and the City-owned Sharp 
Park Golf Course. The PGA is to also provide the City 
with periodic, approximately three times per year, 
agronomic reviews, and training for City Golf 
maintenance. 

Participation in PGA Income Under the Existing 
Agreement : The PGA is to pay the City 50 percent of 
the remaining net revenues realized by the PGA from 
each PGA Tour Championship event held at the 



1 The First Tee Program is a non-profit organization, which is funded by the PGA, Ladies 
Professional Golfers Association (LPGA), the United States Golfers Association (USGA), other major 
golf organizations, as well as local charitable contributions. The First Tee Program provides golf 
programs designed to bring youth of all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds to the game of golf. 
The First Tee Program would be located at Harding Park Golf Course following completion of the 
golf renovation project which is anticipated to be completed in May of 2005. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Harding Park Golf Course, net of PGA costs and the 
other payments to be made by the PGA to the City and 
to the First Tee Program as described above. 
Participation in PGA Income Under the 
Proposed Amendment : Under the proposed 
amendment, the PGA would pay the City 6.66 Percent 
of any "Gross Operating Revenues" in excess of 
$10,000,000 for each PGA Tournament held at the 
Harding Park Golf Course (see Comment 1). 

Under both the existing and the proposed amended 
Agreement, all payments to be made by the PGA to the 
City would be increased by the percentage increase in the 
Consumer Price Index. 

Description: As previously noted, under the terms of the existing 

Master Tournament Agreement, the PGA would hold a 
PGA Tour Championship event three times over a nine- 
year period commencing on January 1, 2006. Harding 
Park Golf Course would be partially or completely closed 
to the public for the two-week period beginning four days 
before the start of the week-long Tour Championship 
event and ending within three days after the Tour 
Championship event is completed. The Tour 
Championship event is typically held each year in late 
October or early November. 

As previously noted, under the terms of the proposed 
amendment to the existing Master Tournament 
Agreement, the PGA would hold either the PGA Tour 
Championship, the American Express Championship or 
the NEC Invitational, a total of five times over a 15-year 
period commencing in 2005. The American Express 
Championship is generally held in September or October 
and the NEC Invitational is generally held in August. 

According to Mr. Cohen, the two PGA events that would 
be added to the proposed amended Agreement, namely 
the American Express Championship and the NEC 
Invitational, are comparable to or better than the PGA 
Tour Championship in terms of: a) quality of PGA Tour 
field of players who are likely to compete in the PGA 
tournaments; b) attendance; and, c) television coverage 
and viewership (see Comment No. 2). 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

89 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 1. As discussed in Attachment I and as illustrated in the 

comparison contained in Attachment III, as provided by 
the RPD, under the proposed amendment, the City would 
receive between $120,000 and $250,000 more per event 
using the RPD's tournament revenue assumptions than 
the City would receive under the existing Agreement. In 
addition, the PGA's $500,000 payment to the First Tee 
Program under the proposed amendment is now 
guaranteed, whereas under the existing Agreement, only 
$250,000 was guaranteed as a Phase 1 payment and a 
Phase 2 payment to the First Tee Program was dependent 
on the realization of net income by the PGA for the event. 
The Budget Analyst concurs with the RPD estimates 
contained in Attachment III. However, it should be noted 
that the financial impact of changing the City's 
percentage participation from 50 percent of the remaining 
net revenues realized by the PGA, after all payments to 
the City, including the payment to the First Tee Program, 
to 6.66 percent of Gross Operating Revenues in excess of 
$10,000,000 for each PGA tournament held at the 
Harding Park Golf Course is unknown at this time. 

The Budget Analyst previously reported that it would be 
highly unlikely that the City would receive any payments 
based on 50 percent of the PGA's net revenues. Based on 
the change to a percentage payment of 6.66 percent of the 
PGA's Gross Operating Revenues from each tournament 
held at the Harding Park Golf Course, the Budget Analyst 
still believes that it would be highly unlikely that the City 
would receive any additional payments since the most 
optimistic gross revenue assumption estimated by the 
RPD is $5,000,000 per PGA tournament. According to Ms 
Fong, the change to percentage of Gross Operating 
Revenues is consistent with the approach used in other 
City leases, and eliminates the need for the City to 
determine the PGA's net income. Mr. Cohen adds, that 
should the PGA's Gross Operating Revenues from such 
tournaments exceed $10,000,000 in the future, the City 
would participate in such revenues regardless of whether 
or not the PGA realized any net income. 

Moreover, the Budget Analyst estimates that, should a 
PGA tournament held at Harding Park Golf Course 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

90 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



actually achieve such Gross Revenues at some point in 
the future, the PGA would have to also realize a large net 
income margin, in excess of 23 percent, for this provision 
in the existing agreement to result in more revenue to the 
City than would be realized under the proposed 
amendment. The Budget Analyst beheves that such a 
future net income margin is also highly unlikely. 

2. Attachment IV to this report, provided by Mr. Cohen, 
contains a table, which was compiled from source data 
provided by the PGA, that compares the two tournaments 
that would be added as potential PGA events to the PGA 
Tour Championship Tournament specified in the existing 
Agreement. As shown in Attachment IV, the two 
tournaments that would be added under the proposed 
amendment, the American Express Championship and 
the NEC Invitational, each exceed the PGA Tour 
Championship Tournament as measured by the quality of 
the PGA players that participate (strength of field), 
attendance, and television viewership (shown as 
"cumulative reach" in Attachment IV). 

3. In March of 2002, the RPD reported to the Finance 
Committee that the total estimated project costs for the 
Harding Park renovation project would be $16,027,610. 
However, the RPD now reports that the actual cost of the 
renovation project will be $23,750,000, thereby exceeding 
the original estimate by approximately $7,722,390 or 48.2 
percent. 

The table on the next page displays the original budget, 
the original sources of funding, the revised budget, the 
additional expenditures required for project completion, 
the additional sources of funding and the final budget. 
Attachment V to this report, a memorandum from Mr. 
Yomi Agunbiade of the Department of Public Works, 
provides the reasons for the increased expenditures of 
48.2 percent which are now required to complete the 
Harding Park Renovation Project. 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

91 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 







Revised 


Additional 






Original 


Original 


Expenditure 




Expenditure by Facility 


Budget 


Budget 


Required 


Final Budget 


Golf Course Renovation ' 


$8,419,210 


$9,301,610 


$2,648,390 


$11,950,000 


Parking (2) 


- 


1,200,000 


- 


1,200,000 


New Clubhouse' 2 ' 


5,512,000 


4,312,000 


3,438,000 


7,750,000 


New Maintenance Facility 


1,214,000 


1,214,000 


1,436,000 


2,650,000 


New Driving Range ' 


882,400 


- 




- 


Cart Barn 


- 


- 


200,000 


200,000 


Total Project Expenditures 


$16,027,610 


$16,027,610 


$7,722,390 


$23,750,000 


Project Funding Sources 










State Grant Monies 


$13,127,627 




$3,500,000* 


$16,627,627 


RPD Matching Funds 


2,149,983 






2,149,983 


Private Matching Funds 


750,000 


up to: 


4,500,000** 


5,250,000 


Total Funding 


$16,027,610 


up to: 


$8,000,000 


$24,027,610 


Revised Original Budget Notes 









1 . New driving range was completed as part of the Golf Course renovation. 

2. Parking lot project was completed separately from the clubhouse. 

* State Grant Funds for the construction of the new Harding Park Clubhouse 
were approved by the Board of Supervisors on February 10, 2004 Q7ile 04- 
0011). 

** According to Mr. Agunbiade, the up to $4,500,000 in new Private Matching 
Funds will consist of $900,000 from the First Tee Program, $100,000 from 
the PGA, as called for in this proposed amendment to the Agreement, and 
up to $3,500,000 from other private funds that are now being finalized. Mr. 
Agunbiade states that none of these funds can be expended until a 
resolution authorizing the RPD to accept and expend such funds is 
approved by the Board of Supervisors, and that such a resolution will be 
submitted to the Board of Supervisors no later than June of 2004. 

4. According to Ms. Elizabeth Goldstein, Executive 
Director of RPD, pending the approval of this proposed 
amendment to the Master Tournament Agreement and 
completion of the Harding Park Renovation Project, which 
is expected to occur in May of 2005, including the 
construction of a new Clubhouse, the first PGA 
Tournament event to be held at the Harding Park Golf 
Course will be the American Express Championship 
Tournament in October of 2005. 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed resolution. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

92 



ft I. la i. nine n i 



ty and County of San Francisco 



Page 1 of 3 
Recreation and Park Department 




January 28, 2004 

Finance and Audit Committee 
Board of Supervisors 



Thru: 



Elizabeth Goldstein 



From: Jaci Fong 

Subject: Harding Park - First Amendment to Master Tournament Agreement 

Issue: 

Discussion and possible action to approve a resolution approving the First Amendment to Master 
Tournament Agreement with the PGA TOUR, Inc., for the use of Harding Park Golf Course. 

Background/Description: 

On April 19, 2002, the City entered into a Master Tournament Agreement (the "Agreement") with the 
PGA Tour, Inc. (the "PGA Tour"). The Agreement was passed unanimously by the Board of 
Supervisors by Resolution #219-02. Under the Agreement, the PGA TOUR would bring the PGA 
Tour Championship (the "Championship") to Harding Park approximately once every three years, 
which will result in the payment of a facility fee by the PGA Tour and an infusion of revenues to the 
City generally from expenditures by Championship attendees. 

As previously stated, a major PGA TOUR event offers a critical means towards achieving the ultimate 
goal of providing the best possible recreational experiences for San Franciscans at affordable fees. 
These major PGA tournaments will bring worldwide media exposure to Harding Park, allowing the 
City to charge premium rates to tourists and non-residents who will be drawn to the course because of 
the cache associated with a TOUR event. The course therefore acquires identification that would 
allow the City to raise a disproportionate amount of revenue from a small number of non-residents 
paying a higher fee, thereby subsidizing resident fees at rates lower than they otherwise would be. 

If approved, the proposed amendment would increase the PGA TOURS commitment to the City by 
extending the initial term of the agreement and increase the guaranteed fee to the City from $250,000 
to $500,000. In addition, the PGA TOUR would provide general support to improve local golf by 
providing design services to renovate Lincoln Park and Sharp Park golf courses. The changes and 
additional enhancements to the Master Tournament Agreement are further detailed in Exhibit A. 



icLaren Lodge, Golden Gate Park 

31 Stanyan Street 

an Francisco, CA 94117-1898 



93 



Phone:(415)831-2700 
Fax: (415)666-7050 



Attachment I 
Page 2 of 3 



Financial Impact: 

Each Tournament at Harding Park will result in a guaranteed payment of $500,000 to the City and 
$500,000 to the First Tee of San Francisco. Both the City and the First Tee of San Francisco will 
receive 6.66% of gross revenues in excess of $10,000,000 per event. 

Although the PGA TOUR normally prefers not to disclose its financial information, the PGA TOUR 
presently receives an approximate 20% gross margin from the sale of hospitality and tickets for these 
events. Assuming that the PGA TOUR can maintain their 20% gross margin in this market place, at 
$10 million in gross revenue, the City together with the San Francisco Chapter of the First Tee each 
receives their guaranteed payment of $500,000 and the PGA TOUR (a non-profit organization) 
receives $1 million in profit. Regardless of whether or not the PGA TOUR maintains a 20% gross 
margin or makes a profit at all, beyond $10 million in gross revenue, the City and the local chapter of 
the First Tee each receive 6.66% of gross revenues. In theory, the PGA TOUR would keep an equal 
amount in profit. As shown on Exhibit B, under even optimistic revenue assumptions a gross share is 
as beneficial to City as a percentage lease share. The concept of revenue sharing based on gross 
receipts vs. net revenues is consistent with most City leases. Should the need arise, this eliminates the 
necessity for the City to incur the extra cost from auditing the PGA TOUR's expenses as well as gross 
receipts. In addition, if the economics change for the worse, the City benefits even if the PGA 
TOUR's margins erode. 

In addition, the City will receive one-time benefits from the proposed amendment. The TOUR will 
1) pay $100,000 for incremental costs for the clubhouse, 2) forgive the local chapter of the First Tee 
for its out of pocket costs associated with providing design and construction management services for 
the renovation of Harding Park golf course, in the amount of $120,000, 3) provide design services for 
both Lincoln Park and $harp Park golf course, valued at over $1 million, 4) and the Tour will provide 
periodic agronomic reports and framing for Harding Park. 

The question has also been raised as to the overall economic value to the City as a whole. Studies 
done of PGA TOUR events held at other venues estimate that the total impact ranges from $10 to $65 
million depending on the market size, event stature and circumstances surrounding any event in any 
single year. As shown on Exhibit C, each of the proposed alternative events meets or exceeds the 
TOUR Championship under each of these criteria. 

In addition, as previously stated, a major PGA. TOUR event offers a critical means towards achieving 
the ultimate goal of providing the best possible recreational experiences for San Franciscans at 
affordable fees. 

Update: 

In September 2003, Recreation and Parks completed the renovation of the Harding Park Golf Course. 
It reopened on schedule to national acclaim, and is now considered one of the top courses in the 
country, public or private. The Project did suffer costs overruns; 2.2 million dollars due to a major 
storm in December 2003, $1.2 million dollars for parking, $1.4 million to finish the maintenance 
facility, and $2 million dollars for the clubhouse itself. Fortunately, the City has identified external 
sources, including additional state grant funds, charitable contributions and additional funding from 
the PGA TOUR to cover all of those costs. " 



94 



Attachment I 
Page3 page 3 of 3 

Recommendation : 

In addition to the financial benefits called out above, Staff believes the local economy will further 
benefit by the additional 2 events that will be played during the initial term of the agreement, and that 
in the unlikely event of the demise of the TOUR Championship, the City will benefit from having the 
flexibility of hosting the NEC Invitational or the American Express Championship. Staff 
recommends approval of the resolution approving the First Amendment to Master Tournament 
Agreement with the PGA TOUR, Inc., for the Use of Harding Park Golf Course. 



95 



cd 

5 S 
.5 = 






< 

!E 
x 

m 



w 



— CO 

ca co 

■3 ►» 

c co 

a a 

a o 

co § 

•5 > 
co 

u O 

- H 

13 ca 

I* 3 

^ CO 

8 S "§ 

p- CO ca 

H X* co 



- 


n 


^ 


u 





— 


_, 


— 






— 


ri 


— 1 




od 






.'. 


CN 


r~ 


C 


ca 



5 £ 

5u 



<2 ca IS 
P CO 

III 

c — ° 
o U § 

u o g 

CO _C IS 



B u 

H co 



>> 

=3 
> 
o 



= 
ex 



fe 



d co 



A L. L,aV.IUIICII L 11 

PcTgB~i 0.t, "2 



E M CO ^ g 



£0 






— „, co 



U a 

B c 

-C CD 

*~ > 

CO CD 



O * 

cu ca 

X) C^ 

o .S 



TT U 



•a <n 



2 o 



il 

fi p4 

<5 p 

-a O 

~B H 

Q 



O * 

a o 

s "§> 

3 3 
* 2 
2x 

=i> B 

ca xi 

£ CO 



£ eg 

= E 

to cu 

8..1 

- i » 1 

2 * S > 



<x .2 8 

2 M c 



a 

.a I 



c ja 



bo 
Q 

•3 



S U 



o > 

r* CO 

.2 13 



cu O 



H ca 



U 



o 



• H 



_ T3 



>1 >1 

ca ."5 



CO 

— co 

ca co 

. 'S. § q, a. 
co B '.fl * IS 

„ & Ea cs W co 

^ U > § 5 

>-> ~> s u S, 

5 W M 'C c 

o. 5 U 2 § 

So e si 

« H 2 < U 

co 
> 

CO • • • 



* d 




p 


ca 
CO 


u 





!— 




CO ^ 






-, 




H 


C^ 


u 


Co 


CO 


^ 


O 

E 


Cj 


p 


U 





m 


o 


H 



e 



> 

W 

"96" 



Attachment II 



T3 
<D 

C 

o 
o 



jE 

X 
HI 




u 

o 

a 
a 
o 



be 

T3 



3 



.a 
o 






i 

p 

5 



— n h 



o 
a 
o 



u 

'— 

S ° 
7 00 

> 



a 


a 


n 


a 


'— 




q 
a* 


.5 


>a 




u 


<N 


•s 


ZZ 


&e 


n 










-z 




■ — 



Cfl 


fee 






ft 




u 


o 






n 


p, 




3 


a 




cr 


— 



U 



U 



O 



53 'C 
> o 

- JS "C 

Oh m a. 



a 
a" 



5.1 

a u 



3 

8 1 

to <L) 

.a >- 

£ o 

-2 H 

o sa 

O £3 

si 

r 1 " 2 •§ 

££! 



53 
g 

f^ > 

<u O 

ft & 

p 9 

•a o 

"^ °" 



u 

_. o 

§ a . 




page 2 c 



."5 o 

U S3 

.a 5 

® as 

-w ,>> 

<U — 

S " 

5 i 

3 a 

3 & 



f 2 



+3 > 

3 W 



ft CL, 



u -4 

a 3 
8 a 

> r^ 
ID — 

'-H <D 

+-. <u 

u x> 

d ID 
QB > 
.S § 



3 O 



o cS 

10 c3 



W 



a 








l-f 




-. 








GQ 




(1) 


d 


s 








> 





W 



P4 Ph 







f> 


— 




— 




c 







C 


— 


a 




(1 1 









^ 


CO 








~f"l 


U 




■g 






eg 


u 

CO 

P 
O 


'cn 

U 






CO 


O 








u 


O 


P 


• ) 






a 





"2 
"> 




3 
O 


a 



1 








U. 


-1 


n 










&< 


> 


can 


O 




a 


Lj 


~ 


O 

d 
u 


■> 


ah 




3 
3 



d 


i 


a 
£- 

5c 


u 


M 


a 
a 


3) 


p 


:p 


c 


1 


to 
U 

-a 





1-1 

•3 



c_ 


53 

— 



97 



Attachment III 



6JD 

< 



HZ, 

a 



— 
E 

— 
U 
OS 
P 
O 
i- 

< 

- 









— 
u 


e 


© 








o 

o 








o 


a 








o^ 








o 


© 


© 








o" 








p, 


o 


o 








o 











o 


o 








o 




e 




£ 


in 


in 










_o 


e 




«a 


«/* 












e 
















fee 


g 


© 


& 
















§ 


a 
e 


u 
















«n 


_' 






© 




© 


o 


o 


o 


E£ 


&e 






a 




s 


3 


o 


o 








o 




o 


o 


o 


o 








b 




















o 




o 


o 


o 


o 








p 


m 




in 


m 


■tf 


i> 








u 


cn 




en 




CN 


oo 








w 




w 


fee 


fee 


fee 








-a 


c: 


s 








o 
o 










O 


=5 








o^ 








6 


O 


o 








o" 








p. 


©7 


o 








o 








o 


o 


o 








o 


O 

a 
o 


a 
a 


£ 


fi 


m 


in 








fee 


fN 


o 


U 
















**! 


oc 


















r^ 


V5 






o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


Vr 






d 
u 


o 




s 


— 


o 


o 








o 




o 


o 


o 


o 




























b 


© 


ie 


© 


© 


^n 


u-> 








3 


u-> 




in 


m 


© 


m 








U 


CN 




CN 






r-» 








€>0 




fee 


&e 


&e 


fee 








— 


© 


© 








o 

o 








o 


o 
















o 


o 


© 








© 








c^ 


o 


©' 








o 








p 


o 


o 








o^ 


e 


e 
s 
s 






in 


in 










o 


>, 




&e 


fee 








fee 


o 


© 


.Th 
















o 
in 


e 
ir, 


U 
















fS 


Efl 






— 




s 






o 


6/5 






c 

1) 


o 
o 


© 


o 
© 






o 
©__ 








b 


©' 


fee 


©" 






o 










u-i 




in 






o 








u 


cs 




CN 






IT) 








fee 




fee 






fee 



« feb 



s 
■5 s 



o 



e 


O 


n 


ft 


a 


< 


a 





§ 


ft 



O 


£j 


H 


. 


< 


a 





S 
a 


ft 




uo 


6 


C3 


+j 


a 


c 









£ 


— 



«gf O ■/-> ON 
O © CN f~~- 



tN m — 



Ph H 



« o cn m 



CQ 
■♦J 

X 

HI 








rn 


Cs 







o> 







rs 


in 




a 




_: 


CN 


s 




fee 


be 



2 © 

> ON 



OS O CN 



3 Z 



O H 



O ti_i 



u «m 



rt 



O H 



a r o ft 



11 N > D. 



U ft 



2 ." -3 



►5 ft H 



98 



O Z 



Attachment IV 
Page 1 of 2 



e. 
E 



« ^ 



4J < 



C-^T- u < 

« «>; . . 

= - >> «3 

t 3 B « 
S >-l .^ < 

- (2 ~ 






« U 



d u to 5* 

a u ■" U 
c > 2 _ 

I -c ~ 13 



•c 

2 pa 
> 2 



- a 



1 1 B I 



m (n ^ 



U 

2 -a 

O 

a. 

o 
u 

E- 



P 

o 
o 

ft. 



a 

■a 



E 

■E 

U 



o o ^ o 

o o c o 

< < =. 5 



u u 


w 


u 










u 


u 


Li 


Li 


o 


u 


i) 




B 







c 
a 


Cf3 


•J 


_1J 


■J 






:3 




£ 


£ 


"5 


iZ 










i<— ^ 


£' 


>- ^ K 


R 


< 


H < 


f— 


o 


e 


a 


-• 




a 




5 






n 




a 


s 


J 


s 


ta 


5 





< 


E 


< 


9 










(J 


u 


u 


U 


d 


d 

V3 


-j 


d 


u 


c 


-3 


c 


^ 


a 


J 





JS. 








a. 




D. 


~ 


E 


J] 


E 


CB 


J3 

.S 


eb 


J3 




u 




U 



C 08 1 

ri "O- d 



•3- a r- m c> 



Z => "* s 



u 

< 
Z 



r*i ■* ts 

ri n-> -y 



- < 











































e»0 






































2 








.= 




















to 


















u 




n. 




es 




















u 


















LZ 




)5 




K 




CJ 


u 

K 














■a 




















I 
u 

B 
n 

~ 


U 
> 




— 






U 
1) 


U 

— (N 

dj o 


V 

3 

S3 
> 


g 


— 


PS 


n 

8 


1 

£5 


o 

c 

C9 


a 

u 


C 


in 
a 




o 

n 
a 




o 
in 

a 

a 


a. 
O 


u 




N 

£ 


c 
g 

99 


> 

c 



> 


_2 


u 


a 

4J 


■3 

s 




1 5 


ri 


c~) 


rj 







- 

a 


H 


■— 


h h 


n 


1/3 

3 




> 




< 


u 

u 


z 


2 


CO 


oo U 



•? 2 



99 



Attachment IV 
Page Z of 2 

• Strength of Field (minimum 750) : The sum of the "World Ranking 1 ' points of the 
individual players participating in the tournament. The points are established by the 
"Official World Golf Ranking," which is endorsed by the four major championships and 
the six professional lours which make up the International Federation of PGA Tours. 

• Attendance (minimum 125,000) : Sum of daily persons attending for the week of the 
tournament (Tuesday-Sunday). Attendance includes paid and unpaid attendees. 

• Cumulative Reach (minimum 20%) ; The total unduplicated percentage of U.S. 
television households in use reached during the four-day tournament events as defined 
Nielsen Media Research. 



100 



City and County of San Francisco 




Recreation and Park Department 

Attachment V 
Page 1 of 2 



DATE: March 4, 2004 

TO: Ken Bruce, Budget Analyst 

FROM: Yomi Agunbiade, Capital Program Manager 

RE: Harding Park Golf Course Renovation Project 

Funding Sources and Uses 

Please find below the information requested regarding the cost overruns for the Harding Park project 
and the funding sources identified to cover those identified overruns. Attached also is a spreadsheet 
showing sources and uses with original budgets for each portion stated. Currently construction is 
underway on the Maintenance Facility and the Clubhouse construction contract is scheduled to be 
awarded by the Recreation and Park Commission at their March 1 8, meeting. It's important to note that 
state grants and private donations totaling $8,000,000 have been identified to cover 100% of the cost 
overruns described below. 

If you have any further questions, you can reach me at 415-581-2555. 
Harding Park Golf Course Renovation: Unforeseen Project Costs 



Golf Course Renovation ($2,648,390) 

1 . Well Destruction ($35.000) : old irrigation well discovered on course required destruction 
in accordance with Health Dept policies. 

2. Old Restaurant Demolition ($154,000): Structure was intended for re-use as the 
headquarters for the First Tee Program. After start of building renovation work, the 
building condition was too poor for use. Abatement, demolition and utility shut down 
required. An 850 gallon fuel tank was discovered during this demolition and required 
removal. Re-programming of this area required survey and design services. 

3. Cart Bam Demolition ($24.000): Structure was intended for re-use, but beams could not 
support load of new electric cart chargers. 

4. Course Drainage Failures ($1,555,000): Course drains were designed to collect runoff 
and allow for percolation into ground. Major storm in December revealed failure of 
system. New hard-piped system needed to be installed to get water off course. 

5. Course Erosion ($880,390): Erosion damage came as a result of the drainage failures. 



Required reconstruction of two major slopes and three minor slopes. 



Maintenance Facility ($1,436,000) 

1 . Additional Facilities ($1.235,000) : the maintenance facility required more program 
elements than originally planned. Original concept included one large storage/repair 
building. Final design included main maintenance structure, offices, mechanic repair 
shop, small tool and irrigation storage, a separate structure for fertilizer storage, bins for 
dirt, sand, greens mix, etc., a an equipment washdown area and an employee parking 
lot. 

2. All new utilities ($166.000): The maintenance facility site did not have any utilities. New 
utilities required included water, electricity, telephone, gas and sewer. Sewer line also 
required pumps to cross over 60" water main adjacent to street. 



Capital Division 

30 Van Ness Avenue 5 th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94102 



Pagel of 2 



Phone:(415)581-2559 
Fax: (415)581-2540 



101 



Harding Park Golf Course Renovation Project 
Funding Sources and Uses 



Attachment V 
P age 2 uf 2 



Well Destruction (S35.00Q) : old irrigation well discovered on site required destruction in 
accordance with Health Dept policies. 



Clubhouse ($3,438,000) 



1 . New utility services ($252,000): Existing phone and electrical service needed upgrade. 
Existing service came from line across bottom of Lake Merced. New service would need 
to be trenched (plus dispersal around site). 

2. Expanded Facility (S3.1 86.000): Original budgeted design was underestimated and did 
not meet all needs of course, users and capacity for special events. The current design 
is a two story, 14,000 useable square foot clubhouse with a pro shop, dining facility 
for 150, kitchen, locker room/event room, restrooms, snack bar and storage on the 
first floor. The second floor will include a large assembly room with a deck view of 
the course, offices, restrooms, a meeting room, and storage and utility spaces. A 
small basement area will house building utilities. The facility will be used on a daily 
basis to serve golfers, the general public, the course operator and the First Tee of 
San Francisco who will operate their program from this building. The original 
10,500 square foot building did not include space for the First Tee nor adequate 
dinning or kitchen facilities for hosting "Shotgun" tournaments and other special 
events which are more common in the industry. The clubhouse as designed 
maximizes the public use of the golf course and provides increased revenue 
opportunities. 



Cart Bam ($200,000) 

1 . New structure and electrical services ($252.000): Original intent was to utilize existing 
structure. Existing structure was in poorer condition than expected and could not support 
the load of electric cart chargers. 

TOTAL: $7,722,390 

Note: All costs include design, construction and management costs 







Revised 


Additional 






Original 


Original 


Expenditure 


Revised 


Expenditure by Facility 


Budget 


Budget 


Required 


Budget 


Golf Course Renovation' 1 ' 


$8,419,210 


$9,301,610 


$2,648,390 


$11,950,000 


Parking' 21 


- 


1,200,000 


- 


1,200,000 


New Clubhouse' 2 ' 


5,512,000 


4,312,000 


3,438,000 


7,750,000 


New Maintenance Facility 


1,214,000 


1,214,000 


1,436,000 


2,650,000 


New Driving Range' 1 ' 


882,400 


- 




- 


Cart Barn 


- 


- 


200,000 


200,000 


Total Project Expenditures 


$16,027,610 


$16,027,610 


$7,722,390 


S23,750,000 


Project Fundinq Sources 










State Grant Monies 


$13,127,627 




$3,500,000 


$16,627,627 


RPD Matching Funds 


2,149,983 






2,149,983 


Private Matching Funds 


750,000 




4,500,000 


5,250,000 


Total Funding 


$16,027,610 




$8,000,000 


$24,027,610 


Revised Original Buqdet Notes 











1 . New driving range was completed as part of the Golf Course renovation. 

2. Parking lot project was completed separately from the clubhouse. 



102 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 9 - File 03-1960 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance and Audits Committee at its 
meeting of February 11, 2004. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Taxi Commission 

Ordinance amending Article 16 of the Police Code by 
adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to establish 
administrative penalties and procedures for violations of 
the full-time driving requirement and for violations of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code includes a list of 
infractions and the corresponding fine amounts for such 
infractions for violations committed by Taxicab permit 
holders of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. 
According to Mr. Farell Suslow of the Police Department, 
citations for such violations are issued by the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail. According to Mr. Tom Owen of 
the City Attorney's Office, an infraction is the lowest 
category of a criminal offense. Mr. Owen states that 
citations for infractions are issued by police officers and 
the violations are prosecuted by the District Attorney. 

Currently, there are fine amounts for such infractions 
which Mr. Owen states can only be imposed by the 
Courts. However, there are no administrative penalties 
for violations committed by Taxicab permit holders of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. According to 
Mr. Owen, an administrative penalty is a fine or 
monetary penalty levied directly by an administrative 
agency pursuant to authorizing legislation. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Article 16 of the 
Police Code by adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
authorize the Taxi Commission's Executive Director to 
impose administrative penalties for violations committed 
by Taxicab permit holders instead of assessing the 
existing fine amounts for infractions set by the Courts. 
Ms. Naomi Little, Executive Director of the Taxi 
Commission, advises that the proposed administrative 
penalty amounts have been set at the same level as the 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

103 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



existing infraction fine amounts for violations committed 
by taxicab permit holders of the Taxi Commission's rules 
and regulations. According to Ms. Little, the existing fine 
amounts range from a low of $25 to a high of $250 for the 
first violation. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code and Appendix 6 of 
the Administrative Code allows the Taxi Commission to 
suspend or revoke a taxicab permit if the taxicab permit 
holder violates the full-time driving requirement. In 
accordance with these Codes, taxicab permit holders are 
required to be "full-time drivers," which is defined as the 
operation of the taxi at least four hours during any 24- 
hour period on at least four hours during any 24-hour 
period on at least 75 percent of the business days during 
the calendar year. Taxicab permit holders may lease their 
Taxicab permits, at any rate they choose, to other drivers 
for the remaining time when the permit holder is not 
driving his or her taxicab. According to Mr. Owen, the 
District Attorney may prosecute violations committed by 
taxicab permit holders of the full-time driving 
requirement. However, there are no fine amounts 
assessed for infractions or administrative penalties with 
respect to violations of the full-time driving requirement 
committed by taxicab permit holders. 

The proposed ordinance would establish an 
administrative penalty amount for violations of the full- 
time driving requirement. The penalty amount could not 
exceed 1.5 times any lease fees charged by the taxicab 
permit holder to the other drivers who lease their 
taxicabs. 

The proposed new Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
Article 16 of the Police Code would also: 

• Establish procedures for the imposition of the new 
administrative penalties, such that the Executive 
Director notifies the taxicab permit holders in writing 
of the violation, the amount of the administrative 
penalty, and the right for the taxicab permit holder to 
request an administrative review of the Executive 
Director's determination of the violation. 

• Establish administrative review procedures, such that 
the taxicab permit holder may request an 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

104 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

administrative review of the Taxi Commission's 
Executive Director's determination of a charged 
violation within 15 business days of the date of notice 
of the violation. The hearing officer is to provide a 
written recommendation to the Executive Director who 
may adopt, modify, or deny the hearing officer's 
recommendations. The seven member Taxi 
Commission could overturn the Executive Director's 
final decision by a two-thirds vote. According to Mr. 
Owen, taxicab permit holders charged with criminal 
violations are afforded due process through the Courts, 
whereas, taxicab permit holders charged with 
administrative violations would be afforded due 
process through an administrative proceeding. 

• Authorize the Taxi Commission to collect 
administrative penalties, and authorize the Tax 
Collector to impose a hen against any real property 
that the taxicab permit holder may own, if the 
administrative penalty is unpaid after 30 days of the 
notice of the violation. Currently, the Superior Court 
collects the fines for cited infractions and issues a 
warrant for arrest for unpaid fines. Mr. Owen notes 
that by statute, the City must split any criminal fines 
collected for infractions with the State, but the City 
would retain all of the revenues generated from the 
collection of administrative penalties. 

• Authorize the Executive Director to assess additional 
fees pertaining to the violations committed by taxicab 
permit holders in order to recover the costs incurred in 
enforcing the administrative penalties, including the 
costs of the Taxi Commission, the Police Department 
and the Tax Collector. Ms. Little states that the Taxi 
Commission, the Police Department, and the Tax 
Collector would have costs associated with the 
investigation, citation, and collection of the 
administrative penalties. Ms. Little states that the 
amount of such costs have not yet been estimated but 
that the Taxi Commission will work will the 
Controller's Office to determine the amount of the 
costs to be charged by the Taxi Commission to those 
taxicab permit holders who commit violations. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Little, the intent of the proposed 

ordinance is to assess administrative penalties on taxicab 

Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

105 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



permit holders who commit violations of the Taxi 
Commission's Rules and Regulations, in addition to 
existing infraction penalties which are assessed for such 
violations, and to assess a penalty for violations of the 
full-time driving requirement. Ms. Little advises that the 
District Attorney, in the past, has not fully prosecuted 
taxicab permit holders who commit such violations. Ms. 
Little advises that in FY 2002-2003, the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail issued 34 citations, totaling 
$2,525 in fines. As of the writing of this report, Ms. Little 
does not know how much of the $2,525 of fines were paid. 

2. According to Ms. Little, and as described in the 
Attachment, "The Taxi Commission wants the ability to 
pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions 
for infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have 
to rely on the District Attorney's decision whether or not 
to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not 
invoke the full range of criminal justice procedures. 
Furthermore, it would not stigmatize permitholders with 
criminal prosecutions. Finally, administrative penalties 
create a faster resolution of disputes." As previously 
noted, such penalties would be assessed by the Director of 
the Taxi Commission instead of assessing the existing 
fine amounts for infractions set by the Courts. 

3. According to Ms. Little, the existing authority of the 
Taxi Commission to suspend or revoke the permits issued 
to taxicab holders for violations of the full-time driving 
requirement is too stringent because such citations 
impact the taxicab permit holders livelihood. As described 
in the Attachment to this report, provided by Ms. Little, 
"when the Commission believes suspension or revocation 
is harsh, but needs to discipline the taxicab permit holder, 
the Commission should be able to impose administrative 
penalties." 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

106 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 10, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 




Har/vey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Peskin 
Supervisor Sandoval 
Supervisor McGoldrick 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Ben Rosenfield 
Ted Lakey 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

107 



City and County of San Francisco 




Attachment 
Page 1 of 4 

Taxi Commission 
Mayor Willie L Brown, Jr. 

Naomi M. Litdc 
Executive Director 



MEMORANDUM 

TO: HARVEY ROSE 

BUDGET ANALYST 

PROM: NAOMI LITTLE 

DATE: JANUARY 14, 2004 

SUBJECT: TAXI COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES 

There are currently 7,500 taxicab drivers, 1,381 taxicab permits, 30 color schemes and 10 
dispatch companies. Taxicab permitholders ' are required to keep their taxicabs in 
continual operation. A three-layer system exists in San Francisco. When a permitholder 
is not driving, the permitholder leases his or her medallion to non-medallion drivers 
through color scheme holders.* The permitholder is paid a lease fee by the color scheme, 
and in turn, the color scheme charges the taxicab driver 3 a gate fee for the use of the 
vehicle for the day. All meter fare income goes directly to the driver. 

The Taxi Commission ("Commission") has pending 105 full-time driving requirement 
investigations. Additionally, the Commission is performing comprehensive audits of the 
color schemes and dispatches. 

Existing Rules and Regulations, Citation. Enforcement and Fine Collection 

Section 1187. Commission Rules and Regulations; Violations; Administrative 
Penalties. 

Curreudy, under Municipal Police Code § 1185, violations of Article 16 of the Municipal 
Police Code, which includes Taxi Commission rules and regulations, are chargeable by 
the District Attorney as an infraction. The Police Department's Taxi Detail issues these 
citations. In Board of Supervisor Ordinance 106-99, the Board amended the Police Code 
to make violations of the Taxi Commission's Rules and Regulations an infraction by 



1 'Termit holders" are also referred as "medallion holders." A medallion holder is any permittee licensed 
by the City to own and operate a taxicab. 

2 "Color scheme holders" are permittees licensed by the Ciiy to operate a taxicab color scheme. Tlxe phrase 
"Color Scheme Holder," "Taxicab Company" and "Taxi Company" may be used interchangeably. 

' "Taxicab Drivers" are nor.-medallion holders. A taxicab driver is a penrutee licensed by the City to drive 
on behalf of the medallion holder. 



] Dr. Carlton B. Goodlecc Place, Room 448, San Francisco, CA 94102 
(415)554-7750 • Fax (415) 554-7751 • email: rftaxi. corruTuston@sfgov.org • website: wwwjfi 

108 



Dv.org/caxiccmmLSSiori 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 4 

establishing fines, and outlining the degree of fines levied for violations of the Taxi 
Commission Rules. 

Existing Rules and Under Municipal Police Code § 1090, the Taxi Commission only has 
the power to suspend or revoke a permit for good cause after a noticed hearing. Good 
cause includes violating the full-time driving requirement, failure to pay a permit fee, 
operating without insurance, being convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, failure 
to satisfy a judgment for damages arising out of negligent operation, violation of the 
Municipal Traffic Code or California Vehicle Code, and any other applicable statute, 
ordinance, rule or regulation pertaining to the licensing of taxi permits. 

Currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission requires a 
driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. 

Role of the SFPD Taxi Detail; 

The Police Department oversees criminal enforcement the Taxi Commission Rules and 
Regulations and the Full-Time Driving Requirements. This includes street enforcement, 
local or state law violation complaints, and lost propeity recoveiy. Street enforcement 
entails monitoring taxicabs on the street to determine whether the driver is carrying his or 
her A-card (i.e. driver's permit card), identification badge and to ensure the taxicab is 'in 
compliance with the California Vehicle Code, the Municipal Police Code and the Taxicab 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. The Taxi Detail additionally performs Proposition 
K, Color Scheme and Dispatch Audits for the Taxi Commission. 

For fiscal year 2002-03 die SFPD Taxi Detail issued 34 citations containing a total of 42 
violations as follows: 

23 violations for S25 = $575.00 

16 violations for 75 = 1,200.00 

3 violations for 250 - 750.00 

Total = $2,525.00 

This process was not fully operational throughout the entire fiscal year. The Taxi Detail 
wanted to issue more infraction citations than they were allowed because the Superior 
Court had not approved all of the infraction penalties for the Taxi Commission Rules & 
Regulations. Even though the Board of Supervisors and Taxi Commission approved the 
infraction penalties, the infraction penalties are subject to Superior Court approval. 

Also, infraction citations are not forwarded to the DA's office. They are submitted 
directly to the Superior Courts. They are handled the same as traffic tickets. Cases that 
would be cited as misdemeanors do go to the DA's office. 



109 



Attachment 
Page 3 of 4 

Problems with Existing Citation, Enforcement and Fine Collection Procedures 

In performing audits each year, the Taxi Commission is finding that color schemes are 
continuing to violate certain Taxi Commission Rules. Suspension or revocation of a 
color scheme permit (i.e. taxicab company) is extremely drastic because it not only 
affects the color scheme, but the numerous drivers and taxicab permit holders that are 
affiliated with the color scheme. Suspension of a color scheme essentially suspends the 
taxicab permit holders' permits at that color scheme, regardless if the taxicab permit 
holders violated any rules. The Taxi Commission needs a vehicle to discipline color 
scheme permit holders without affecting the medallion holders or drivers. 

As explained, currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission 
requires a driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. These penalties do not serve as deterrence. It is just the cost of doing 
business. 

Administrative penalties create a process of escalated discipline that begins with fines 
and leads all the way up to revocation. By way of history, most permitholders believe 
that the San Francisco Board of Appeals will overturn Taxi Commission revocation of 
permit decisions for failure to comply widi the full-time driving requirement. The Board 
of Appeals has criticized the Taxi Commission for immediately suspending or revoking a 
permit for failure to comply with the full-time driving requirement after the first offense. 
They believe this measure is extreme. More likely than not, the Board of Appeals will 
start upholding the Taxi Commission revocation decisions, if the Commission penalized 
the permitholder on an progressive scale: i.e. an administrative fine for the first offense; 
suspension for the second offense; and revocation for the third offense. 

Additionally, suspending or revoking a permit because a permitholder fell short of the 
full time-driving requirement by a few shifts; or violated the Commission rule of 
possessing and issuing comment cards is a drastic measure. When the Commission 
believes suspension or revocation is harsh, but needs to discipline the permitholder, the 
Commission should be able to impose administrative penalties. 

Proposed.New Administrative Penalties 

The Commission believes administrative penalties will encourage all permitholders to 
comply with Commission rules. Permitholders will take their chances that if they appeal 
the Commission's revocation decision to the Board of Appeals, the Board will overturn 
the Taxi Commission's decision. 

Fines for violating the full-time driving requirement will not exceed 1 .5 times any lease 
fee collected by the permitholder during the period that he or she did not meet the full- 
time driving requirement. For example, if the permitholder lease fee is $1,800\ then the 
fine could be up to $2,700. In imposing the fine, the Executive Director can take into 



1 In December 1998, Police Code 1 135.2 set a lease fee cap ot'Sl.SQO/month. However, in December 
2000, the provision expired. Currently, the lease fee is set by marker demands. 



110 



Attachment 
Page 4 of 4 



account whether the permitholder had previous violations, whether there was willful 
concealment and/or misrepresentations to the Taxi Commission, or mitigating 
circumstances. I guarantee, no permitholder wants to pay a fine of $2,700. 

In imposing administrative penalties, which the proposed ordinance would establish, the 
Commission would like to use the same infraction fine schedule. The Taxi Commission 
wants the ability to pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions for 
infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have to rely on the District Attorney's 
decision whether or not to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not invoke the 
full range of criminal justice procedures (with their attendant costs and burdening the 
courts). Furthermore, it would not stigmatize perrnifholders with criminal prosecutions. 
Finally, administrative penalties create a faster resolution of disputes. 

Taxi Commission Hearing Procedures 

Beginning in July 2003, the Taxi Commission established a hearing officer to hear alt 
disciplinary cases that were brought before the Taxi Commission. To protect the rights 
of all the taxi permitholders, the Hearing Officer is not an employee of the Taxi 
Commission, but a Department of Parking and Traffic Hearing Officer. These 
disciplinary hearings are heard on the first Friday of every month. The Hearing Officer 
conducts the hearing, and makes a recommended decision. The Executive Director of the 
Taxi Commission, who can adopt, modify, or deny such recommendation and prepare a 
final decision on the matter, automatically reviews the proposed decision. The Executive 
Director places the final decision on the Taxi Commission's consent calendar for the next 
scheduled meeting. The Taxi Commission may only modify or overturn the Executive 
Director's decision by a two-thirds' vote. Tne Taxi Commission's decision is appealable 
to the Board of Appeals. 

Any time the Taxi Commission grant, denies, suspends or revokes a permit, the matter 
may be appealed to the San Francisco Board of Appeals within 15 days of the Taxi 
Commission decision pursuant to Charter 4.106. 



Ill 




City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Agenda [PTMji I Anrtjiilrfiliuiuii-] 

66 SF Public Library 

^Finance and Audits Committee Govt. Information Center, 5 th Fir. 

Members: Aaron Peskin, Gerardo Sandoval, Jake McGoldri ATTN: Michael Sherrod-Flores 

Clerk: Victor Young 
Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:30 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 

Note: Each item on the Consent or Regular agenda may include the following documents: 

1) Legislation 

2) Budget Analyst report 

3) Legislative Analyst report 

4) Department or Agency cover letter and/or report 

5) Public correspondence 

These items will be available for review at City Hall, Room 244, Reception Desk. 

?ri 

Each member of the public will be allotted the same maximum number of minutes to speak as set by 
the Chair at the beginning of each item, excluding City representatives, except that public speakers 
using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony 
time limit. If simultaneous translation services are used, speakers will be governed by the public 
testimony time limit applied to speakers not requesting translation assistance. 



AGENDA CHANGES DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

MAR 1 5 2004 
REGULAR AGENDA san francsco 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 
03-1 



City and Count)' of San Francisco I Printed at 12:1-1 PM on .<'//»■/ 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 17, 2004 

1. 031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving 

requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations] 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1 1 86, 11 87, and 1 1 88, to 
restate the full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for 
violations of the full-time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and 
regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: 

Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Barry Taranto, Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney. 

Continued to 2/1 1/04. 

1/28/04, CONTINUED AS AMENDED. 

2/1 1/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Thomas Owen, Deputy City 

Attorney; Tara Houseman; James Kennedy, Mark Gruberg; Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana; Martin Smith; W. Blake Derby; 

Barry Taranto; William Guthrie; Brooks Dyer; Mulgeta Woldemariam; Anne McVeigh; Johnson Akinboaunse; Mark Giogi; 

Dennis Korkos; Norma Geer; Michael Spain; Gerald Ganley; Jane Bolig; Robert Gross; David Basada, Jim Nakamura, Todd 

Rydstrom. 

Continued to 2/25/04. 

3/10/04. AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: 

Tom Owen, City Attorney's OfTce; Rua Grafis. 

3/10/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 17, 2004. 

ADJOURNMENT 



IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City, by the time the proceedings 
begin, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a part of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. Any 
written comments should be sent to: Committee Clerk of the Finance and Audits Committee, San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors, I Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 
94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the 
committee clerk by that time may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 



(Not to be considered at this meeting) 

Rule 5. 40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREA TE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction. The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing. In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken. 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at 12:15 PM on 3/11/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 17, 2004 

040194 [Employee Catastrophic Illness Program] 
Supervisor Ammiano 

Ordinance amending Section 16.9-29A(d) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize 
employee reimbursement of the Catastrophic Illness Program upon qualification for or receipt of 
disability benefits and amending Section 16.9-29A(i) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to 
authorize employee transfer of unused hours to pool if participation in Catastrophic Illness Program 
expires or is terminated. 

2/10/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance and Audits Committee, expires on 3/1 1/2004. 



City and County of San Francisco 3 Printed at 12:15 PM on 3/11/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday. March 17, 2004 

Meeting Procedures 

The Board of Supervisors is the Legislative Body of the City and County of San Francisco. The Board has 

several standing Committees where ordinances and resolutions are the subject of hearings at which members of 

the public are urged to testify. The full Board does not hold a second public hearing on measures which have 

been heard in committee. 

Board procedures do not permit: 1) persons in the audience at a Committee meeting to vocally express support 

or opposition to statements by Supervisors or by other persons testifying; 2) ringing and use of cell phones, 

pagers, and similar sound-producing electronic devices; 3) signs to be brought into the meeting or displayed in 

the room; 4) standing in the meeting room. 

Citizens are encouraged to testify at Committee meetings and to write letters to the Clerk of a Committee or to 

its members, City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102. 

Agenda are available on the internet at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs.bos.htm. 

THE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL, ROOM 244, RECEPTION 

DESK. 

Board meetings are cablecast on SF Cable 26. For video tape copies and scheduling call (415) 557-4293. 

Requests for language translation at a meeting must be received no later than noon the Friday before the 

meeting. Contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554-7704. 

AVISO EN ESPANOL: La solicitud para un traductor en una reunion debe recibirse antes de mediodia de el 

viernes anterior a la reunion. Llame a Erasmo Vazquez (415) 554-4909. 

(415) 554-7701 



Disability Access 

Both the Committee Room (Room 263) and the Legislative Chamber are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #47 Van Ness, and the #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, 

call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of City Hall at Civic Center Plaza and adjacent to Davies Hall and the 

War Memorial Complex. 

All meetings are real-time captioned and are cablecast open-captioned on SF Cable 26. 

The following services are available when requested 48 hours before the Committee meeting. This advance 

notice will help ensure availability. 

■ For American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting, contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554- 

7704. 

• For a large print copy of agenda or minutes in alternative formats, contact Annette Lonich at (415) 554-7706. 

• Assistive listening devices are available from the receptionist in the Clerk of the Board's Office, Room 244, 
prior to the meeting. 

• The Clerk of the Board's Office TTY number is (415) 554-5227. 

In order to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or 
related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various 
chemical based products. 



City and County of San Francisco 4 Printed at 12:15 PM on 3/11/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 17, 2004 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine 
Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the 
people's review. For information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Donna Hall; by mail to Sunshine 
Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco CA 94102 by phone at (415) 
554-7724, by fax at (415) 554-7854 or by email at Donna.Hall@sfgov.org 

Citizens may obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance by contacting Ms. Hall or by printing Chapter 67 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code on the Internet, at http://www.sfgov.org/sunshine.htm 

Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements 

Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be 
required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance [SF Campaign & Governmental Conduct Code Sec. 2.100] to 
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the 
San Francisco Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102; telephone 
(415) 581-2300; fax (415) 581-2317; web site www.sfgov.org/ethics 



City and County of San Francisco S Printed at 12:1.1 PM on 3/1 1/04 



41b bb4 Yi 14 

By: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS; 415 554 7714; 



/lar-16-04 5:17PM; 



Page 1 /1 



BOARD of SUPERVISORS 




City Hall 

Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244 

San Francisco 94102-4689 

Tel. No. 554-5184 

Fax No. 554-5163 

TDD/TTY No. 544-5227 



F 

I 



NOTICE OF CANCELLED MEETING 

^ FINANCE AND AUDITS COMMITTEE 
SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAR 1 7 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the meeting of the Finance and Audits Committee 
scheduled for Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 12:30 p.m. at 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett 
Place, Room 263, City Hall, San Francisco, California, has been cancelled. 

Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board 



Cancelled Meeting Notice/Ad 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN Fl [Budget Analyst Report] 
SF Public Library 
Govt. Information Center, 5 th Fir. 
ATTN: Michael Sherrod-Flores 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



TO: -" Finance and Audits Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: March 17, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 1 - File 03-1960 



March 11, 2004 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAR 1 5 2004 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Note: 



This report reflects the Amendment to the Whole adopted by the Finance 
and Audits Committee at its meeting on March 10, 2004. 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Taxi Commission 

Ordinance amending Article 16 of the Police Code by 
adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to restate the full- 
time driving requirement, and to establish administrative 
penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time 
driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi 
Commission's rules and regulations. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code includes a list of 
infractions and the corresponding fine amounts for such 
infractions for violations committed by Taxicab permit 
holders of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. 
According to Mr. Farell Suslow of the Police Department, 
citations for such violations are issued by the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail. According to Mr. Tom Owen of 
the City Attorney's Office, an infraction is the lowest 
category of a criminal offense. Mr. Owen states that 
citations for infractions are issued by police officers and 
the violations are prosecuted by the District Attorney. 

Currently, there are fine amounts for such infractions 
which Mr. Owen states can only be imposed by the 
Courts. However, there are no administrative penalties 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 17, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



for violations committed by Taxicab permit holders of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. According to 
Mr. Owen, an administrative penalty is a fine or 
monetary penalty levied directly by an administrative 
agency pursuant to authorizing legislation. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Article 16 of the 
Police Code by adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
authorize the Taxi Commission to impose administrative 
penalties for violations committed by Taxicab permit 
holders instead of assessing the existing fine amounts for 
infractions set by the Courts. Ms. Naomi Little, Executive 
Director of the Taxi Commission, advises that the 
proposed administrative penalty amounts have been set 
at the same level as the existing infraction fine amounts 
for violations committed by taxicab permit holders of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. According to 
Ms. Little, the existing fine amounts range from a low of 
$25 to a high of $250 for the first violation. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code and Appendix 6 of 
the Administrative Code allows the Taxi Commission to 
suspend or revoke a taxicab permit if the taxicab permit 
holder violates the full-time driving requirement. In 
accordance with these Codes, taxicab permit holders are 
required to be "full-time drivers," which is defined as the 
operation of the taxi at least four hours during any 24- 
hour period on at least four hours during any 24-hour 
period on at least 75 percent of the business days during 
the calendar year. Taxicab permit holders may lease their 
Taxicab permits, at any rate they choose, to other drivers 
for the remaining time when the permit holder is not 
driving his or her taxicab. According to Mr. Owen, the 
District Attorney may prosecute violations committed by 
taxicab permit holders of the full-time driving 
requirement. However, there are neither fine amounts 
assessed for infractions nor administrative penalty 
amounts with respect to violations of the full-time driving 
requirement committed by taxicab permit holders. 

The proposed ordinance would establish an 
administrative penalty amount for violations of the full- 
time driving requirement. The penalty amount could not 
exceed 0.5 times any lease fees charged by the taxicab 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 17, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



permit holder to the other drivers who lease their 
taxicabs. 

The proposed new Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
Article 16 of the Police Code would also: 

• Establish procedures for the imposition of the new 
administrative penalties, such that the Executive 
Director notifies the taxicab permit holders in writing 
of the violation and appoints a Hearing Officer from a 
list approved by the Taxi Commission. The Hearing 
Officer would recommend the amount of the 
administrative penalty and submit that 
recommendation in writing to the Taxi Commission. 
The Taxi Commission may adopt, modify, or deny the 
Hearing Officer's recommendations, including the 
recommended penalty amounts, by a simple majority 
vote. According to Mr. Owen, taxicab permit holders 
charged with criminal violations are afforded due 
process through the Courts, whereas, taxicab permit 
holders charged with administrative violations would 
be afforded due process through an administrative 
proceeding. 

• Authorize the Taxi Commission to collect 
administrative penalties, and authorize the Taxi 
Commission to suspend or revoke the permit of the 
Taxicab permit holders, if the administrative penalty 
is unpaid after 30 days of the notice of the violation. 
Currently, the Superior Court collects the fines for 
cited infractions and issues a warrant for arrest for 
unpaid fines. Mr. Owen notes that by statute, the City 
must split any criminal fines collected for infractions 
with the State, but the City would retain all of the 
revenues generated from the collection of 
administrative penalties. 

• Prohibit the Taxi Commission from imposing 
administrative penalties for violations of the full-time 
driving requirement (a) if the permit holder is at least 
65 years of age during the calendar year when the 
violation was alleged to have occurred and had driven 
a taxicab in San Francisco for at least 25 years, or (b) 
if the taxicab permit holder is disabled and his or her 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

3 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 17, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



failure to fulfill the full-time driving requirement was 
due to that disability. 

1. According to Ms. Little, the intent of the proposed 
ordinance is to assess administrative penalties on taxicab 
permit holders who commit violations of the Taxi 
Commission's Rules and Regulations, in addition to 
existing infraction penalties which are assessed for such 
violations, and to assess a penalty for violations of the 
full-time driving requirement. Ms. Little advises that the 
District Attorney, in the past, has not fully prosecuted 
taxicab permit holders who commit such violations. Ms. 
Little advises that in FY 2002-2003, the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail issued 34 citations, totaling 
$2,525 in fines. As of the writing of this report, Ms. Little 
does not know how much of the $2,525 of fines were paid. 

2. According to Ms. Little, and as described in the 
Attachment, "The Taxi Commission wants the ability to 
pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions 
for infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have 
to rely on the District Attorney's decision whether or not 
to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not 
invoke the full range of criminal justice procedures (with 
their attendant costs and burdening the courts). 
Furthermore, it would not stigmatize permitholders with 
criminal prosecutions. Finally, administrative penalties 
create a faster resolution of disputes." 

3. According to Ms. Little, the existing authority of the 
Taxi Commission to suspend or revoke the permits issued 
to taxicab holders for violations of the full-time driving 
requirement is too stringent because such citations 
impact the taxicab permit holder's livelihood. As 
described in the Attachment to this report, provided b} 7 
Ms. Little, "when the Commission believes suspension or 
revocation is harsh, but needs to discipline the taxicab 
permit holder, the Commission should be able to impose 
administrative penalties." 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policj^ matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

4 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 17, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 




[arvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Peskin 
Supervisor Sandoval 
Supervisor McGoldrick 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Ben Rosenfield 
Ted Lakey 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

5 



CITY AND COUNTY OF 
SAiN FRANCISCO 



TO: 




MEMORANDUM 



HARVEY ROSE 
BUDGET ANALYST 



TAXI COMMISSION 
MAYOR GAVIN C. NEWSOM 

Attachment 
Page I of 4 

ARTHUR JACKSON. PRJESEENT 

PAUL GILLESPE. VICE PRESIDENT 

UCK. BARRY. COMMISSIONER 

PATRICIA BRESUN, COMMISSIONER 

MARY McGUIRE, COMMISSIONER 

MIN PaEK. COMMISSIONER 

MARTIN SMITH. COMMISSIONER 

NAOMI M. LITTLE. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 



FROM: NAOMI LITTLE 

DATE: March 11, 2004 

SUBJECT: TAXI COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES 

There are currently 7,500 taxicab drivers, 1,381 taxicab permits, 30 color schemes and 1 
dispatch companies. Taxicab permitholders 1 arc required to keep their taxi cabs in 
continual operation. A three-layer system exists in Sail Francisco. When a permitholder 
is not driving, the permitholder leases his or her medallion to non-medallion drivers 
through color scheme holders. 2 The permitholder is paid a lease fee by die color scheme, 
and in turn, the color scheme charges the taxicab driver 3 a gate fee for the use of the 
vehicle for the day. All meter fare income goes directly to the driver. 

The Taxi Commission ("Commission") has pending 105 full-time driving requirement 
investigations. Additionally, the Commission is performing comprehensive audits of the 
color schemes and dispatches. 

Existing Rules and Regulations, Citation, Enforcement and Fine Collection 

Section 1187. Commission Rules and Regulations; Violations; Administrative 
Penalties. 

Currently, under Municipal Police Code § 1185, violations of Article 16 of the Municipal 
Police Code, which includes Taxi Commission rules and regulations, are chargeable by 
the District Attorney as an infraction. The Police Department's Taxi Detail issues these 
citations, hi Board of Supervisor Ordinance 106-99, the Board amended the Police Code 
to make violations of the Taxi Commission's Rules and Regulations an infraction by 



' "Permit holders" arc also referred as '"medallion holders." A medallion holder is any permittee licensed 

by the Ciiy to own and operate a taxicab. 

: "Color scheme holders" are permittees licensed by the City to operate a taxicab color scheme. The phrase 

"Color Scheme Holder," 'Taxicab Company" and "Taxi Company" may be used interchangeably. 

J 'Taxicab Drivers" are non-medallion holders. A taxicab driver is a permitee licensed by the City to drive 

on behalf of die medallion holder. 



I Dr. Carlton B. Goodleti Place, Room 448, San Frajicisce, CA 94 102 
MISl 554-7750 FAY fllSI S.S4.7751, email: sft a.ti cnmmissioriffosfcov org , website: \*r*™ sfgov.org/ta.xicomniission 
MHF-11-2Q04 13=25 415 5547751 96>: P. 02 



Att achment 
Page 2 of 4 



establishing fines, and outlining the degree of fines levied for violations of the Taxi 
Commission Rules. 

Existing Rules and Under Municipal Police Code § 1090, the Taxi Commission only has 
the power to suspend or revoke a permit for good cause after a noticed hearing. Good 
cause includes violating the full-time driving requirement, failure to pay a permit fee, 
operating without insurance, being convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, failure 
to satisfy a judgment for damages arising out of negligent operation, violation of the 
Municipal Traffic Code or California Vehicle Code, and any other applicable statute, 
ordinance, rule or regulation pertaining to the licensing of taxi permits. 

Currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission requires a 
driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. 

Role of the SFPD Taxi Detail: 

The Police Department oversees criminal enforcement die Taxi Commission Rules and 
Regulations and the Full-Time Driving Requirements. This includes street enforcement, 
local or state law violation complaints, and lost property recovery. Street enforcement 
entails monitoring taxicabs on the street to determine whether the driver is carrying his or 
her A-card (i.e. driver's permit card), identification badge and to ensure the taxicab is in 
compliance with the California Vehicle Code, the Municipal Police Code and the Taxicab 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. The Taxi Detail additionally performs Proposition 
K, Color Scheme and Dispatch Audits for the Taxi Commission. 

For fiscal year 2002-03 the SFPD Taxi Detail issued 34 citations containing a total of 42 
violations as follows: 

23 violations for S25 = S 575.00 

16 violations for 75 = 1,200.00 

3 violations for 250 = 750.00 

Total = 52,525.00 

This process was not fully operational throughout the entire fiscal year. The Taxi Detail 
wanted to issue more infraction citations than they were allowed because the Superior 
Court had not approved all of the infraction penalties for the Taxi Commission Rules & 
Regulations. Even though the Board of Supervisors and Taxi Commission approved the 
infraction penalties, the infraction penalties are subject to Superior Court approval. 

Also, infraction citations are not forwarded to the DA's office. They are submitted 
directly to the Superior Courts. They are handled the same as traffic tickets. Cases that 
would be cited as misdemeanors do go to the DA's office. 



riPiP-ll-2034 13=25 415 5547751 9h.--: 



Attachment 
page j of 4 



Problems with Existing Citation, Enforcement and Fine Collection Procedures 

In performing audits each year, the Taxi Commission is finding that color schemes are 
continuing to violate certain Taxi Commission Rules. Suspension or revocation of a 
color scheme permit (i.e. taxicab company) is extremely drastic because it not only 
affects the color scheme, but the numerous drivers and taxicab permit holders that are 
affiliated with the color scheme. Suspension of a color scheme essentially suspends the 
taxicab permit holders 1 permits at that color scheme, regardless if the taxicab permit 
holders violated any rules. The Taxi Commission needs a vehicle to discipline color 
scheme permit holders without affecting the medallion holders or drivers. 

As explained, currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission 
requires a driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. These penalties do not serve as deterrence. It is just the cost of doing 
business. 

Administrative penalties create a process of escalated discipline that begins with fines 
and leads all the way up to revocation. By way of history, most permitholders believe 
that the San Francisco Board of Appeals will overturn Taxi Commission revocation of 
permit decisions for failure to comply with the full-time driving requirement. The Board 
of Appeals has criticized the Taxi Commission for immediately suspending or revoking a 
permit for failure to comply with the full-time driving requirement after die first offense. 
They believe this measure is extreme. More likely than not, the Board of Appeals will 
start upholding the Taxi Commission revocation decisions, if the Commission penalized 
the permitholder on an progressive scale: i.e. an administrative fine for the first offense; 
suspension for the second offense; and revocation for the third offense. 

Additionally, suspending or revoking a permit because a permitholder fell short of the 
fulltime-driving requirement by a few shifts; or violated the Commission rule of 
possessing and issuing comment cards is a drastic measure. When the Commission 
believes suspension or revocation is harsh, but needs to discipline the permitholder, the 
Commission should be able to impose administrative penalties. 

Supervisor Sandoval's Amendment to.the Whole Dated 2/18/04 

The Commission believes administrative penalties will encourage all permitholders to 
comply with Commission rules. Permitholders will take their chances that if they appeal 
the Commission's revocation decision to the Board of Appeals, the Board will overtum 
the Taxi Commission's decision. 

Fines for violating the full-time dnving requirement will not exceed .5 times any lease 
fee collected by the permitholder during the period that be or she did not meet the full- 
time driving requirement. Or, where the permitholder does not collect lease fees, the 
Commission may impose administrative penalty not to exceed an amount yet to be 



Attachment 
Page 4 oT 4 



determined. For example, if the permitholder lease fee is Sl,800 4 , then the fine could be 
up to S9.00Q. Whereas, under the original Taxi Commission proposed legislation, the 
lease fee would be up to $2,700 (i.e. 1 .5 times the lease fee). In imposing the fine, the 
Taxi Commission can take into account whether the permitholder had previous 
violations, whether there was willful concealment and/or misrepresentations to the Taxi 
Commission, or mitigating circumstances. 

In imposing administrative penalties, which the proposed ordinance would establish, the 
Commission would like to use the same infraction fine schedule. The Taxi Commission 
wants the ability to pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions for 
infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have to rely on the District Attorney's 
decision whether or not to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not invoke the 
full range of criminal justice procedures (with their attendant costs and burdening the 
courts). Furfhemiore, it would not stigmati2e pemnitholders with criminal prosecutions. 
Finally, administrative penalties create a faster resolution of disputes. 

Taxi Commission Hearing Procedures 

Beginning in July 2003, the Taxi Commission established a hearing officer to hear all 
disciplinary cases that were brought before the Taxi Commission. To protect the rights 
of all the taxi permitholders, the Heanng Officer is not an employee of the Taxi 
Commission, but a Department of Parking and Traffic Hearing Officer. These 
disciplinary hearings are heard on the first Friday of every month. The Hearing fficer 
conducts the hearing, and makes a recommended decision. The final decision is placed 
on the Taxi Commission's consent calendar for the next scheduled meeting. 

Any time the Taxi Commission grant, denies, suspends or revokes a permit, the matter 
may be appealed to the San Francisco Board of Appeals within 1 5 days of the Taxi 
Commission decision pursuant to Charter 4.106. 



' In December 1998, Police Code 1 135.2 set a lease fee cap of 51,800/monlh. However, in December 
2000, the provision expired. Currently, the lease fee is set by market demands. 



MAP- 11-2034 13=25 415 5547751 9b.". P. 05 




City and County of San Francis f AI1 Committees] 

-Meeting Minutes Mai^Ubra"* D ° CUment Section 



Finance and Audits Committe 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Amn 
Clerk: Mary Red 



Wednesday, March 24, 2004 



1:00 PM 
Regular Meeting 



City Hall, Room 263 



Members Present: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano. 



Meeting Convened 

The meeting convened at 1:15 p.m. 

REGULAR AGENDA 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAR 2 9 Z004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



1 



040219 [Administrative Code Revision: Health Service System] 
Supervisor Daly 

Ordinance amending Chapter 16, Article XV, of Part 1 of the San Francisco Municipal (Administrative) Code 
by amending Section 16.703 regarding Board approval of Health Service System Plans and Contribution Rates. 
(Human Resources Department) 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/27/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 3/16/04, Supervisor Daly requested to be added as a co- 
sponsor 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Jeffrey Hildebrant, Deputy Director, Health Service System Division; Han>ey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Male speaker; Supervisor Daly; Supervisor Ammiano. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040002 [Appropriate funding for the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility renovations] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $1,782,000 from the Courthouse Construction Fund to fund court facility renovations 
and a jurisdictional transfer of property under the control of the City and County of San Francisco for fiscal 
year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

1/6/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/10/04, CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Mr. Parkline. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Super\>isor Peskin; Gordon Park-Li, Superior Court; Supen'isor Daly; 
Superxnsor Ammiano; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Primed at 5:45 I'M on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



March 24, 2004 



040094 [Appropriate funding for program management services for the S.F. Public Utilities Commission Capital 
Improvement Program, Program PEIR, and the intertie between EBMUD and San Francisco's water 
supply system] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $2,747,247 of personnel-operating fund balance from the Water Department and 
512,985,734 of Proposition A Bond funds, for a total of $15,732,981 for: $2,747,247 to fund office space, 
staff and services of other departments for continued implementation of the Capital Improvement Program 
(CIP) of which $595,627 is retroactive, $8,400,000 for the intertie between the East Bay Municipal Utility 
District (EBMUD) and San Francisco's water supply system, and $4,585,734 to fund the Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), of which $400,000 is retroactive for necessary staff in SFPUC to work 
on the program planning efforts to facilitate implementation of the CIP for fiscal year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Jr., Public Utilities Commission (PUC); Supen'isor Peskin; 
Lawrence Banner, Acting Director, Planning Department; Super\>isor Daly; Supen'isor Ammiano; Harvey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Paul Maltzer, Planning Department; Jean Mariani, PUC; Gary Dow, PUC Real 
Estate; Steve Legnitto, Real Estate Department; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Sally Ramon; Chris Durazo; 
Mel Beetle; Delbert Scott; Victor Herrera. 
Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 
RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040095 [Public Employment] 
Mayor 

Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 195-03 (Annual Salary Ordinance 2003/04) reflecting the creation of 7 
positions (1.75 FTE) at the Water Department, 3 positions (0.75 FTE) at the Human Rights Commission, and 5 
positions ( 1 .25FTE) at the Human Resources Department. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Jr., Public Utilities Commission (PUC); Supervisor Peskin; 

Lawrence Banner, Acting Director, Planning Department; Supervisor Daly; Supen'isor Ammiano; Harvey 

Rose, Budget Analyst; Paul Maltzer, Planning Department; Jean Mariani, PUC; Gary Dow, PUC Real 

Estate; Steve Legnitto, Real Estate Department; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Sally Ramon; Chris Durazo; 

Mel Beetle; Delbert Scott; Victor Herrera. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 195-03 (Annual Salary Ordinance 2003/04) reflecting the creation of 4 
positions (1.00 FTE) at the Water Department, 1 position (0.25 FTE) at the Human Rights Commission, and 1 
position (0.25FTE) at the Human Resources Department. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 5:45 PM on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



March 24, 2004 



040037 [Lease of Real Property - 1145 Market Street] 

Resolution authorizing the lease of 30,790 sq. ft. of office space in the building located at 1 145 Market Street, 
San Francisco for the City and County of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. (Real Estate Department) 
1/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Jr., Public Utilities Commission (PUC); Supervisor Peskin; 
Lawrence Banner, Acting Director, Planning Department; Supervisor Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Paul Maltzer, Planning Department; Jean Mariani, PUC; Gary Dow, PUC Real 
Estate; Steve Legnitto, Real Estate Department; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Sally Ramon; Chris Durazo; 
Mel Beetle; Delbert Scott; Victor Herrera. 
Continued to 3/31/04. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



031640 [Airport - Amendment to Concession Agreement and Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations] 

Resolution approving (a) Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for Rental 
Car Operations between Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, 
Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of San Francisco, The Hertz 
Corporation, and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through its Airport Commission; and (b) Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations 
between National Car Rental Systems, Inc. and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

9/26/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/10/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 24, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Kathy Wagner, Airport; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 
Continued to April 14, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



The chair intends to entertain a motion to continue File No. 031960 to the call of the chair. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 5:45 PM on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 24, 2004 



031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving requirement 
and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations] 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1 186, 1 187, and 1 188, to restate the 
full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full- 
time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, 
Taxi Commission; Barry Taranto; Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney. 
Continued to 2/1 1/04. 
1/28/04, CONTINUED AS AMENDED. 

2/1 1/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney; Tara 
Houseman; James Kennedy; Mark Gruberg; Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana; Martin Smith; W. Blake Derby; Barry Taranto; William 
Guthrie; Brooks Dyer; Mulgeta Woldemariam; Anne McVeigh; Johnson Akinboaunse; Mark Giogi; Dennis Korkos; Norma Geer; 
Michael Spain; Gerald Ganley; Jane Bolig; Robert Gross; David Basada; Jim Nakamura; Todd Rydstrom. 
Continued to 2/25/04. 

3/10/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Tom Owen, 
City Attorney's Offce; Rua Gratis. 
3/10/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 17, 2004. 
3/17/04, MEETING CANCELLED. 
Speakers: Mark Gruberg; Male Speaker. 
CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



LITIGATION 



Conference with City Attorney 

[Convene in Closed Session - Existing Litigation - City as Plaintiff and/or Defendant] 

Motion that the Finance and Audits Committee of the Board of Supervisors convene in closed session with the 
City Attorney for the purpose of conferring with, or receiving advice from, the City Attorney regarding the 
following existing lawsuits and claims in which proposed settlements are being considered by the Committee. 
Government Code 54956.9(a) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section Section 67.10(d) permit this 
closed session. Discussion in open session concerning these matters would likely and unavoidably prejudice 
the position of the City in the pending lawsuits and/or claims listed below. 

Unanimous vote to convene in closed session by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 4 Printed at 5:45 PM on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 24, 2004 



040321 [Settlement of Lawsuit - United Air Lines, Inc., et al.] 
Supervisor Daly 

Ordinance authorizing settlement of the lawsuit filed by the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through its Airport Commission against United Air Lines, Inc., for the payment to the Airport of environmental 
clean-up costs and agreement of a percentage allocation for future clean-up costs with regard to City and 
County of San Francisco v. ARCO et al., Case No. C-97-2965 MMC (N.D. Cal.); and for the settlement of an 
unlitigated claim between the Airport, on the one hand, and United Air Lines, Inc. and United Cogen, Inc., on 
the other hand regarding an early assumption by United of its Airport leases and other agreements with regard 
to re UAL Corporation, et al., Debtors, Case No. 02-4819, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern 
District of Illinois, Eastern Division. 

3/16/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. Sponsor requests this item be scheduled for consideration at 
the March 24, 2004 meeting. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



Report on Closed Session 



Deputy City Attorney Ted Lakey reported that the Finance Committee has met in closed session with the City 
Attorney, under the provisions of Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) and Administrative Code Section 67.8 
(3), for the purpose of conferring with, or receiving advice from, the City Attorney regarding settlements in the 
lawsuits or claims listed above. 



[Elect Not to Disclose] 

Motion that the Committee finds that it is in the best interest of the public that the Committee elect at this time 
not to disclose its closed session deliberations concerning the anticipated litigation listed above. 

Unanimous vote not to disclose discussion to the public by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m. 



City and County of San Francisco 5 Printed at 5:4? I'M 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OF SAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGET ANALYST 



1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 941' [Budget Analyst Reoortl 
FAX (415) 252-0461 SF Public Library 

Govt. Information Center, 5 ,h Fir 
ATTN. Michael Sherrod-Flores 



isi 



B«J 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



TO: -e Finance and Audits Committee 

FROM: Budget Analyst MAR 2 3 2004 

SUBJECT: March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Item 1 - File 04-0219 
Department: 



Item: 



Health Service System (HSS) 
Department of Human Resources (DHR) 

Ordinance amending Chapter 16, Article XV, of Part 1 of 
the San Francisco Municipal (Administrative) Code by 
amending Section 16.703 regarding the Board of 
Supervisors approval of Health Service System Plans and 
Contribution Rates. 



Description: 



The proposed ordinance would amend Section 16.703 of 
the Administrative Code to approve the City's FY 2004- 
2005 Health Service System plans and rates of 
contributions, to be paid by members of the System. These 
plans and rates of contribution were adopted by the 
Health Service Board on February 26, 2004. The members 
of the System include employees and retirees of the City 
and County of San Francisco, the San Francisco 
Community College District (SFCCD), and the San 
Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD), the spouses, 
domestic partners and surviving spouses of such 
employees and retirees, and members of Boards and 
Commissions. 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Health Plans 



In accordance with Charter Sections A8.423 and A8.428, 
the amount of the City's contribution toward health plan 
premiums on behalf of the above-noted employees is based 
on a survey of contributions made by the ten most 
populous counties in California. Based on the survey, the 
Health Service System determined that the City's FY 
2004-2005 contribution, effective July 1, 2004, is $312.90 
per employee per month. This represents an increase of 
$31.69, or approximately 11.3 percent, from the FY 2003- 
2004 contribution rate of $281.21 per employee per 
month. The Board of Supervisors previously approved the 
City's FY 2004-2005 contribution of $312.90 in February 
of 2004 (File No. 03-1974). 

The Health Service System Board has approved four 
health plans for FY 2004-2005: (a) City Health Plan, 
which is a self-funded Preferred Provider Organization 
(PPO) plan currently administered by the Health Service 
System, and (b) three health maintenance organization 
(HMO) plans, including Kaiser, Health Net, and Blue 
Shield. Once the City's contribution is established, the 
Health Service System actuary, Towers Perrin, calculates 
the Health Service System employees' (members) needed 
contributions to the City Health Plan, in order to ensure 
that contributions from all sources will be adequate to 
support anticipated claims for the upcoming fiscal year. 
Towers Perrin determines the monthly premium 
payments for the City Health Plan each year, based on 
claims experience, level of benefits, and Plan enrollment. 
Subsequently, the City negotiates the monthly premium 
payments needed to be paid each year by the members 
who enroll in these plans with the three HMOs. The 
actuarial report and details of the member contribution 
rates to be paid for the City Health Plan and the three 
HMOs, prepared by Towers Perrin, are on file with the 
Clerk of the Board. 

In FY 2004-2005, monthly premiums to be paid by Health 
Service System members for all four health plans, as 
prepared by Towers Perrin, will change ranging from a 
decrease of 2.9 percent to an increase of 26.6 percent as 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
2 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



shown in Attachment I submitted by the Health Service 
System. Several factors affect increases in the monthly 
premium payments, as follows: 

• All four health plans will have changes in the benefit 
levels in FY 2004-2005, including: 

(a) The City Health Plan will increase the 
transgender benefit to eliminate the current one 
year waiting period and increase the lifetime 
maximum benefit from $50,000 to $75,000. In 
addition, effective July 1, 2004, claims payment 
processing will be administered by United 
Healthcare. 

(b) The Kaiser HMO Plan will now administer 
transgender benefits through its network of HMO 
providers. Prescription drug co-payments will 
increase from $5/$10 to $5/$15 (the lower amount 
for generic prescriptions and the higher is for 
name-brand prescriptions) for a 100-day supply. 
In addition, dental benefits have been eliminated 
from the Kaiser HMO Plan and the emergency 
room co-payments increased from $10 to $20 in 
the Kaiser Medicare + Choice plan for retirees. 

(c) The Health Net HMO Plan will now administer 
transgender benefits through its network of HMO 
providers. In addition, prescription drug co- 
payments will change from $5/$10/$20 to 
$5/$15/$25 (retail pharmacy) and $10/$30/$50 for 
mail order prescriptions (the first amount is for 
generic prescriptions, the second amount is for 
name brand, formulary prescriptions and the third 
amount is for name brand, non-formulary 
prescriptions). 

(d) The Blue Shield HMO Plan will now administer 
transgender benefits through its network of HMO 
providers. In addition, prescription drug co- 
payments will change from $5/$10/$20 to 
$5/$15/$25 (retail pharmacy) and $10/$30/$50 for 
mail order prescriptions. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



• The Health Service Board approved a $12 million 
subsidy from the Health Service System Fund on 
February 26, 2004, to reduce the costs to be paid by 
the members for their monthly health plan premium 
as well as the costs to the City, the SFCCD and the 
SFUSD. The Health Service System Fund will pay a 
$9 million subsidy for the City Health Plan and a $3 
million subsidy to for the Blue Shield, Health Net and 
Kaiser plans. Of the total subsidy of $12.0 million, 
$3,520,158 or 29.3 percent will be used to reduce the 
cost to the City's General Fund and $8,479,842 or 70.7 
percent will be used to reduce the costs of the members 
share of the health plan premiums and the costs to the 
SFCCD and the SFUSD. 

• According to the City's Comprehensive Annual 
Financial Report (CAFR) for FY 2003-2004, as of June 
30, 2003 the Health Service System Fund Balance was 
$38,170,000. 

As previously noted, Attachment I is a summary of the 
monthly premium costs to members for each of the four 
health plans, based on information determined by Towers 
Perrin. The monthly premium rates for the City Health 
Plan and the three HMOs are net of the effect of the $12 
million Health Service System Fund subsidy and changes 
in the benefit levels. The Towers Perrin actuarial report, 
which is on file with the Clerk of the Board, contains 
further details on the proposed rates. 

Vision and Dental Plans 

Health Service System members enrolled in the four 
health plans, including the City Health Plan and the 
three HMOs, receive vision benefits. Members enrolled in 
Kaiser receive vision benefits directly from the Kaiser 
plan. Members enrolled in the City Health Plan, Blue 
Shield, and Health Net receive vision benefits through the 
Vision Service Plan (VSP). The monthly premium 
payments for vision benefits are included in each 
respective health plans' monthly premium rates shown in 
Attachment I. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

4 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



I 



Health Service System members may enroll in one of 
three dental plans offered by the Health Service System: 
a fee-for-service plan administered by Delta Dental, and 
two prepaid plans offered by PMI and Pacific Union. As 
noted in Attachment I, in FY 2004-2005 the City pays 
$100.50 per employee per month for dental premiums, 
which is based on the average cost of coverage for all 
employees. In FY 2004-2005, Towers Perrin has 
determined that the monthly premium payments for 
Delta Dental, which is self-insured, would increase by 2.3 
percent, based on claim experience. The FY 2004-2005 
PMI monthly premium payments will increase by 6 
percent for employees and by 2 percent for retirees. The 
Pacific Union monthly premium payments for dental 
benefits in FY 2004-2005 will remain at the same rates as 
for FY 2003-2004. 



Comment: 



The City's total FY 2003-2004 General Fund cost for 
Health Service System benefits to employees, including 
(a) Charter mandated contributions determined through 
the ten County survey, (b) contributions on behalf of 
Retirees mandated by Charter Section A8.428c, and (c) 
additional MOU required "pick-up" costs, to pay for the 
employees' share of the health plan premiums as 
previously approved by the Board of Supervisors, was 
budgeted at $160,500,000. According to Ms. Peg 
Stevenson of the Controller's Office, such General Fund 
costs would increase by $22,280,000 in FY 2004-2005 
based on the rates included in this proposed ordinance 
and the FY 2003-2004 budgeted number of employees, net 
of the $3,520,158 subsidy from the Health Service System 
fund balance that will offset the cost to the General Fund. 
The FY 2004-2005 total General Fund cost for Health 
Service System benefits would therefore be an estimated 
$182,780,000 or approximately 13.9 percent more than 
the FY 2003-2004 General Fund cost of $160,500,000. 
Attachment II is a summary of the projected General 
Fund costs and savings, based on information provided by 
the Controller's Office. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Proposed FY 2004-2005 Health Plan Premiums 



Attac nmen i i 
Page 1 of 2 



Proposed 

FY 2004- 

2005 



FY 2003- 
2004 



Dollar 
Change 



Percent 
Change 



City Health Plan 










Employee Only 


S 432.55 


S 419.38 $ 


13.17 


3.1% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


832.47 


828.70 


3.77 


0.5% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


1,158.51 


1,165.01 


-6.50 


-0.6% 


Retiree without Medicare 


818.37 


810.39 


7.98 


1.0% 


Retiree with 1 spouse without Medicare 


1,218.30 


1,218.71 


-0.41 


0.0% 


Retiree with Medicare 


328.22 


296.36 


31.86 


10.8% 


Retiree with 1 spouse with Medicare 


632.91 


582.67 


50.24 


8.6% 


Blue Shield 










Employee Only 


$ 288.96 


$ 275.32 3 


13.64 


5.0% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


570.19 


546.16 


24.03 


4.4% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


803.10 


770.48 


32.62 


4.2% 


Retiree without Medicare 


597.14 


614.84 


-17.70 


-2.9% 


Retiree with 1 spouse without Medicare 


878.37 


885.68 


-7.31 


-0.8% 


Retiree with Medicare 


412.11 


417.32 


-5.21 


-1.2% 


Retiree with 1 spouse with Medicare 


824.62 


839.65 


-15.03 


-1.8% 


Health Net 










Employee Only 


$ 344.25 


$ 305.71 S 


38.54 


12.6% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


679.51 


606.65 


72.86 


12.0% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


958.42 


875.05 


83.37 


9.5% 


Retiree without Medicare 


760.12 


673.71 


86.41 


12.8% 


Retiree with 1 spouse without Medicare 


1,095.38 


974.65 


120.73 


12.4% 


Retiree with Medicare 


339.76 


301.23 


38.53 


12.8% 


Retiree with 1 spouse with Medicare 


670.58 


597.72 


72.86 


12.2% 


Kaiser 










Employee Only 


$ 292.10 


$ 264.79 $ 


27.31 


10.3% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


576.30 


525.00 


51.30 


9.8% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


812.18 


741.01 


71.17 


9.6% 


Retiree without Medicare 


559.64 


531.06 


28.58 


5.4% 


Retiree with 1 spouse without Medicare 


843.84 


791.33 


52.51 


6.6% 


Retiree with Medicare 


321.59 


253.95 


67.64 


26.6% 


Retiree with 1 spouse with Medicare 


634.58 


503.48 


131.10 


26.0% 



Based on information provided by Towers Perrin 



Httacnmeni i 
Pa ge 2 of 2 



Proposed FY 2004-2005 Dental Plan Monthly Premiums 
Proposed 





FY 2004- 


FY 2003- 


Dollar 


Percent 




2005 


2004 


Change 


Change 


Delta Dental 










Employee Only 


58.83 


57.53 


1.30 


2.3% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


96.70 


94.52 


2.18 


2.3% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


145.41 


142.11 


3.30 


2.3% 


Retiree only 


33.91 


33.76 


0.15 


0.4% 


Retiree with 1 dependent 


67.88 


67.60 


0.28 


0.4% 


Retiree with 2 or more dependents 


102.54 


102.11 


0.43 


0.4% 


PMI 










Employee Only 


23.50 


22.17 


1.33 


6.0% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


38.77 


36.58 


2.19 


6.0% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


57.34 


54.09 


3.25 


6.0% 


Retiree only 


28.65 


28.09 


0.56 


2.0% 


Retiree with 1 dependent 


47.28 


46.35 


0.93 


2.0% 


Retiree with 2 or more dependents 


69.92 


68.55 


1.37 


2.0% 


Pacific Union 










Employee Only 


27.25 


27.25 


0.00 


0.0% 


Employee with 1 dependent 


45.00 


45.00 


0.00 


0.0% 


Employee with 2 or more dependents 


66.53 


66.53 


0.00 


0.0% 


Retiree only 


16.15 


16.15 


0.00 


0.0% 


Retiree with 1 dependent 


26.67 


26.67 


0.00 


0.0% 


Retiree with 2 or more dependents 


39.43 


39.43 


0.00 


0.0% 



According to Towers Perrin actuarial report, the FY 2004-2005 City contribution per employee per 
month will be $100.50 per employe, an increase of $9.56 over the $90.84 contributed in 2003- 
2004. 



Based on information provided by Towers Perrin 



Attachment II 



HEALTH AND DENTAL PLAN OPTIONS 
FY 2004-2005 



C 



Net Increase in Health Service System 
General Fund Costs FY 2004-2005 



Projected 
GF Costs - estimated 



Charter contribution per employee - 10 County Survey 
Charter Required Retiree premium subsidy cost increase 
Dependent health care premiums- MOU Provision 
"Medically single" premium subsidy - MOU Provision 
Dental coverage 



Total 



$6,000,000 
11,000,000 

2,500,000 
680,000 

2.100.000 

$22,280,000 



Health Service Board Actions as of February 26. 2004 



Projected 
GF Savings 



Use of medical fund surplus to reduce City Health Plans 
Use of medical fund surplus to reduce HMO rates 



Total 



($2,522,907) 
(997.251) 

($3,520,158) 



c 



Based on information provided by the Controller's Office 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 2 - File 04-0002 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance and Audits Committee at its 
meeting of March 10, 2004. 



Department: 
Item: 

Amount: 
Source of Funds: 
Description: 



• 



Superior Court 

Ordinance appropriating $1,782,000 from the Courthouse 
Construction Fund to fund court facility interior 
renovations. 

$1,782,000 

Courthouse Construction Fund (see Comment No. 1) 

The Hall of Justice, which is located at 850 Bryant Street 
between 6 th and 7 th Streets, currently houses the Superior 
Court's Traffic Division and 22 courtrooms. The Superior 
Court's Traffic Division administers the adjudication of 
traffic citations including the processing of traffic citations 
and fine payments, referrals to public traffic school, and 
initiating or removing drivers license suspensions, 
according to Mr. Neal Taniguchi of the Superior Court. 
Mr. Taniguchi states that the Traffic Division uses two of 
the 22 courtrooms in the Hall of Justice as traffic hearing 
rooms (Traffic Hearing Room A and Traffic Hearing Room 
B), to hear traffic citation protests. The remaining 20 
courtrooms in the Hall of Justice are trial courtrooms. Mr. 
Taniguchi reports that the Traffic Division is located in 
approximately 8,200 square feet of space on the 1st floor of 
the Hall of Justice, and that the two traffic hearing rooms 
are located in approximately 2,900 square feet of space on 
the 2 nd floor of the Hall of Justice (an average of 1,450 
square feet per hearing room). 

Further, Mr. Taniguchi reports that the Superior Court is 
leasing approximately 6,050 square feet of space which is 
used for three auxiliary courtrooms at 575 Polk Street, in a 
building the Superior Court has been leasing since July of 
1991 (see Comment No. 3). According to Mr. Taniguchi, 
the Superior Court plans to relocate the Superior Court's 
Traffic Division, which, as noted above, has 8,200 square 
feet of space, and its two traffic court hearing rooms, which 
as noted above, has 2,900 square feet, or a total of 11,100 
square feet, from the Hall of Justice to the approximately 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

9 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



6,050 square feet of leased space at 575 Polk Street (see 
Comment No. 4). 

According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court is 
authorized to use the Courthouse Construction Fund to 
pay for (a) the annual debt service on the Civic Center 
Courthouse, which became operational in December of 
1997 and is located at the corner of McAllister and Polk 
Streets, (b) the annual cost of the leased facility at 575 
Polk Street, (c) property insurance costs, (d) capital 
improvements to courthouse facilities, and (e) bond trustee 
finance costs. 

According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court intends to 
expend the requested $1,782,000 in Courthouse 
Construction fund monies to pay for the following three 
renovation projects: 

1) $ 612.000 to renovate leased space at 575 Polk Street 
- 6,050 square feet of leased space, which is currently 
being used as three auxiliary trial courtrooms, would be 
converted from (a) two auxiliary trial court rooms, 
totaling approximately 4,033 square feet, to two traffic 
court hearing rooms (an average of 2,017 square feet 
per hearing room) and from (b) one auxiliary trial court 
room, totaling approximately 2,017 square feet, to office 
and public counter space, to accommodate the 
relocation of the Superior Court's Traffic Division. 
Attachment I is a memorandum from Mr. Taniguchi 
explaining how the Traffic Division, which now 
occupies 8,200 square feet in the Hall of Justice can be 
accommodated by 2,017 square feet at the leased Polk 
Street site. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior 
Court anticipates that construction work for this 
project would begin in the Fall of 2004 and be 
completed by the Fall of 2005. 

2) $670.000 to renovate City-owned space at the Hall of 
Justice - 2,900 square feet of space on the 2 nd floor of 
the Hall of Justice would be converted from two traffic 
hearing rooms, containing an average square feet of 
1,450 each (Traffic Hearing Room A and Traffic 
Hearing Room B), to one new 2,900 square foot trial 
courtroom, which would be used to accommodate 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

10 



) 



• 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

criminal trials. As previously noted, the Superior Court 
currently has 22 courtrooms at the Hall of Justice 
consisting of 20 trial courtrooms and two traffic hearing 
rooms. The subject renovation would result in a total of 
21 trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice. According to 
Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court anticipates that the 
construction work for this project would begin in the 
Fall of 2005 and be completed by the Spring of 2006. 

3) $500.000 for Hall of Justice Courtrooms - All 20 
trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice, totaling 
approximately 60,000 square feet, or an average of 
3,000 square feet per trial courtroom, would be 
renovated. Such renovations would include the 
refurbishing of jury boxes, witness stands, benches, and 
audience seating. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the 
Superior Court anticipates that the construction work 
for these renovations would begin in the Fall of 2004 
and be completed by the Spring of 2006. 

Budget: Attachment II provided by Mr. Taniguchi is a budget for 

the $1,782,000 requested supplemental appropriation 
including City project staff hours and hourly rates. 
According to Mr. Taniguchi, all of the renovation work, 
except for the design and engineering work and project 
management to be performed by the Department of Public 
Works, will be awarded on a competitive bid basis (see 
Comment No. 5). 

Comments: 1. The Courthouse Construction Fund was established for 

the purpose of receiving revenues from surcharges on civil 
and probate filing fees, and parking citations as follows: (1) 
limited jurisdiction cases, which are lawsuits under 
$25,000 - $10.00; (2) unlimited jurisdiction cases, which 
are lawsuits over $25,000 - $50.00; and (3) parking 
citations - $1.00. According to Mr. Taniguchi, as of 
February 4, 2004, the unappropriated balance in the 
Courthouse Construction Fund was $5,425,954. Approval 
of this subject request of $1,782,000 would result in an 
unappropriated fund balance of $3,643,954. 

2. Mr. Taniguchi states that the Superior Court currently 
has 59 trial coxirtrooms comprised of 20 trial courtrooms at 
the Hall of Justice, 36 trial courtrooms at the Civic Center 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

U 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Courthouse, and 3 auxiliary trial courtrooms at 575 Polk 
Street. After completion of the subject interior facilities 
renovation projects, Mr. Taniguchi reports that the 
Superior Court will have 57 trial courtrooms comprised of 
21 trial courtrooms at the Hall of Justice and 36 trial 
courtrooms at the Civic Center Courthouse. 

3. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court is 
currently leasing a total of approximately 8,870 square 
feet of space, at approximately $2.15 per square foot per 
month, at 575 Polk Street, for a total rental cost per month 
of $19,101 ($229,212 annually), of which approximately 
6,050 square feet of space, as noted above, is used for three 
auxiliary trial courtrooms. The remaining 2,820 square 
feet is used as office space, jury deliberation room space, 
and juror and witness waiting room space. According to 
Mr. Taniguchi, one of the auxiliary trial courtrooms, 
totaling approximately 2,017 square feet, is currently 
being used as a temporary juvenile traffic hearing 
courtroom and two of the three auxiliary trial courtrooms, 
totaling approximately 4,033 square feet, is currently 
being used for overflow trial courtroom space, which is 
used when there are more trials than courtrooms available 
at the Civic Center Courthouse. According to Mr. 
Taniguchi, the Superior Court anticipates that the 
temporary juvenile traffic hearing room will be moved to 
Juvenile Hall prior to the commencement of the proposed 
subject renovation work at 575 Polk Street, and the two 
overflow trial courtrooms will be eliminated as a result of 
the proposed renovation project. 

4. According to Mr. Taniguchi, the Superior Court plans to 
relocate the Traffic Division, including its administrative 
space and its two traffic hearing rooms, from the Hall of 
Justice to the leased facility at 575 Polk in order for the 
Hall of Justice facility to accommodate more criminal 
trials, by constructing one additional trial courtroom at the 
Hall of Justice. As stated on page 2 of Attachment III 
provided by Mr. Taniguchi, "The Court's recently adopted 
facilities master plan identified an existing and long-term 
shortage of criminal trial courtrooms in the Hall of Justice. 
Because of this shortage, criminal cases are often 
transferred from the Hall of Justice to the Civic Center 
Courthouse for trial, which causes delay, inefficiency, and 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

12 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 3, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

increased costs for both the City and the Superior Court. 
The Superior Court is therefore adding one new large trial 
courtroom to the Hall of Justice through the Hall of Justice 
renovation project to address the shortage problem." 

5. Mr. Taniguchi advises that, because 575 Polk Street is 
not a City-owned building, the normal City process for 
competitively selecting a contractor for the 575 Polk Street 
project does not apply, and the landlord is responsible for 
selecting the contractor. However, Mr. Taniguchi advises 
that the landlord is likely to use a competitive bidding 
process in selecting the contractor for renovations made at 
575 Polk Street. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



» 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

13 



Superior Court of California 

County of San Francisco 



Gordon Park-Li 

Chief Executive Officer 



NEAL I TANIGUCHI 
Chief Fiscal Officer 



February 24, 2004 



TO: Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst 

FROM: Neal Taniguchi, Superior Court 

RE: Courthouse Construction Fund Appropriation request 

Relocation of Traffic Division to 576 Polk Street 



You requested the Court to explain why it plans to move its Traffic Division from Room 101, at the Hall 
of Justice, which consists of approximately 8,200 square feet, to a smaller space at 575 Polk Street. 

The Superior Court's Traffic Division, which processes and adjudicates traffic citations, and other non- 
serious infractions, consists of 38.5 FTE positions, and currently shares Room 101, at the Hall of Justice 
with the Criminal Division, Clerk's Office (about 42 FTE). Because the Traffic Division currently shares 
Room 101 with the Criminal Division, the square footage, on a per FTE basis, is roughly the same as 
what the Traffic Division will occupy, once 575 Polk Street is renovated. 

The Court is simply attempting to more efficiently use its existing office space to accommodate the need 
for additional criminal courtrooms. 

If you should have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. 



c 



Gordon Park-Li 



400 McAllister Street - Room 205 

San Francisco, CA 94102-4514 

ntaniguchi@sftc.org 

14 



c 



E 1 o 



Page 1 of 2 



O EQ 



a; o 
E E 



» m 
< 5 

o o 





en 








a 


cd 


"re 
> 


"to 

~3 


o 


o 


£ 




o 


"re 
X 


o 




^ 




o 




CJ 






CO 






T3 


o 


o 


a. 


E 




o 


r~- 


in 



tO fcO fcO 



< o 

E S 



CJ 03 CD 

=J != en 

— 3 c= 

to •= = 



^— CD 






O O CD 



CD O CD 

C3 O CD 

O CO o* 

■^ CO CD 



fee to to to 



o o o 



CD O CD 



fee- to- to- to 



S Q 4? 



cj — ^ 

^- to cr o 

.9 co co S 

o s .£ w 



ssi 



CD 



CD 



en 



CL 

cd s e 

.Q c: "CJ 

2 | E 

n p o 

o — — 

CD u r3 

CD en je, 
o" .?= CD 

* o W 

•5 >-- "H5 

3 jd. en 
'r: - — ■ "9 

O o 3 

_-oa 

s S g> 

'--8 € 



•* to §- 

.2 -S2 -o 
en CD CD 

5 ^> "2 

n o" *- 
> r^ cd 

O CO S 

c to- iS 
£ o w 
F ""> — 
o l^.~ 
O CD .5 
j; S ^ 

5 fee- o 

CJ 

" J3 O 

3 «j 12 

-3 ° te 

—a . m 
■*- o fee 

° .a.™ 

re 2 = 

1 Q. O 

cd <S =5 

£ S -a 



° = -<= 

£ -a - 

re cd -H 
ELg 

« £ -Q 

<D S ro 

"S ® ^ 

"5 5 tt 



CD 



r = ° 

re o <J 
"o O CD 



6 ■ = 



15 



H l td llimcu i ± 

Page 2 of 2 



r 



^a-cocno^j-ococo 

COOOCMCMCOCOCD 



n (D CM o 









cm co co o 

CM ■* CO (N 
1- CM 



^J 




CO 


ro 


iC 


DC 


o 




LL 




m 


a 


Is, 




uo 


I 



•jOMcoMorocM 
cDino^cnoocD 
un en o_ en en cm co_ cm_ 
CO co" co~ CO LO~ co" CO co" 
T CO CM CM 

CM CM CO t- CM O 

CD ■* CM Q N. CO 



cm en ^i- co t— o 
cm -q- h- r-- co -q- 



cococncocMoenLn 
■«— t— en -a- cx> o co ■«— 
en co_ en en en cm cm t— 
cm" co" o" co" tri" co" co" o" 

-3" CO CM CM 



CD 




te- 


fc=- 


ee 


fee- 


fc-3- 


to- 


fee- <=o 


c3 

< 


_QJ 


CM 


CM 


CO 




CM 


O 




75 


co 


-3- 


cm 


cr^ 


1 — 


cc 




</> 


a: 
















E 


_>■ 
















o 



















CO CO CO CO T— o 

t- ^ n n co Tf 

CO CO CO 



..<" ™ *- 



a? 



lD -2 -* " 

T? ^ = « S 



CD 



53 o •■= " 



U 



p ~ x: 



< 

p w LU ■= 



= < 



mw<<<ooh 






16 



c 



uperior Court of Calif orni 

County of San Francisco 



RrLOtlMIICII L 111 



Page 1 of 2 



Gordon Park-Li 

Chief Executive Officer 



NEAL ! TANICUCHI 
Chief Fiscal Officer 



January 2 1,2004 



TO: Leanne Nhan, Analyst 

Budget Analyst's Office, Board of Supervisors 

FROM: Neal Taniguchi 

I-JL. I.-.m 04-0002, Supplemental Appropriation in ihu amouni oi SI , 782,000, from the 

Courthouse Construction Fund 

cc: Presiding Judge Donna Hitchens 

Gordon Park-Li, Chief Executive Officer 

In response to your information request regarding the proposed supplemental appropriation request from 
the Courthouse Construction Fund, you will find attached to this memo, all supporting documentation on 
the proposed projects. 

Background 

The Courthouse Construction Fund is a special fund created pursuant to State law. The Fund may only be 
used for the acquisition, rehabilitation,, construction, and financing of courtrooms and court facilities (GC 
Section 76100). Revenues appropriated to the Fund are derived from surcharges on civil filing fees and a 
surcharge on parking citations. In the past, the Fund was used to finance the construction of the Civic 
Center Courthouse, which opened to the public in December 1997. 

The current operating surplus, as of February 4, 2003, was $5,425,954. This proposed ordinance would 
appropriate $1,782,000 from that surplus. 



400 McAllister Street - Room 205 
San Francisco, CA 94102-4514 
ntanisuchi@sftc.org 
17 



Budget 



The proposed uses of the fund are as follows: 



Page 2 of 2 



Estimated f 

Project Cost 



1. Interior Renovations - Hall of Justice, Traffic Hearing 
Rooms A&B. Both hearing rooms would be combined into one 
trial courtroom to accommodate additional criminal trials. This 
project would be implemented in conjunction with the relocation 
of the Court's Traffic Division to its leased 575 Polk Street 
facilities (see below). The Court's recently adopted facilities 
master plan identified an existing and long-term shortage of 
crirninal trial courtrooms in the Hall of Justice. Because of this 
shortage, criminal cases are often transferred from the Hall of 
Justice to the Chic Center Courthouse for trial, which causes 
delay, inefficiency, and increased costs for both the City and 
County and ihe Superior Court, The SuperioT Court is therefore 
adding one new large trial courtroom to the Hall of Justice 
through the Hall of Justice renovation project to address the 

shortage problem. 5670,000 

2. Interior Renovations - Hall of Justice, various courtrooms. 

Jury boxes, witness stands, benches, and audience seating have 

not been refurbished in years, or in some cases, since the 

opening of the building . This proposed project would make 

improvements to the most dilapidated courtrooms. 500,000 

3. Interior Remodel - 575 Polk Street, leased facility. The Polk 

Street facility would be remodeled to accommodate the Traffic 
Division, which would be relocated from the Hall of Justice to 
provide space for additional trial court proceedings. 612.000 

TOTAL proposed expenditures $1,782,000 






18 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Items 3 and 4 - Files 04-0094 and 04-0095 

Note: The PUC advises that an Amendment of the Whole to File No. 04-0094 will 
be introduced at the Finance and Audits Committee meeting on March 24, 
2004 that corrects the funding source inaccuracies contained in the original 
legislation. This report is based on the forthcoming Amendment of the 
Whole. 



Departments: 



Items: 



I 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 

Planning Department 

Department of Human Resources (DHR) 

Human Rights Commission (HRC) 

Department of Public Works (DPW) 

Airport 

File No. 04-0094: Ordinance appropriating $16,719,301 
as follows: (a) $8,400,000 for a capital improvement 
project to construct the Intertie Project (see below) 
between the East Bay Municipal Utility District and San 
Francisco's water supply system, (b) $4,677,000 for a 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) to be 
prepared by an outside consultant, and related inhouse 
PUC staff assistance to facilitate the PEIR and other 
program planning efforts required for the Water System 
Capital Improvement Program (Water System CIP), and 
(c) $3,642,301 for office space, staff and services of other 
departments for continued implementation of the Water 
System Capital Improvement Program. 

File No. 04-0095 : Ordinance amending the FY 2003- 
2004 Annual Salary Ordinance to create 15 new positions 
(3.75 FTEs) from April 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004, the 
last three months of FY 2003-2004. 



Amount: 



$16,719,301 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

19 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Source of Funds: 

Table 1: Funding Sources for Subiect Supplemental Appropriation 


r 






Funding Sources 


Intertie 
Project 


PEIR 


Additional Office 

Space, Staff and 

Services of Other 

Departments 


Budget 


Proposition A 2003 Water System 
Capital Improvement 
Program Bond Funds 


$8,400,000 






$8,400,00 


Reappropriation of Proposition A 
Bond Funds previously 
approved by the Board of 
Supervisors 




$4,677,000 




4,677,00 


Overhead charges to existing 
Water System Capital 
Improvement Project 
appropriations 






$3,642,301 


3.642.30! 


Total 


$8,400,000 


$4,677,000 


$3,642,301 | $16,719,30 



Background: 



File No. 04-0094: On May 28, 2002, the Public Utilities 
Commission approved the PUC's $3.6 billion Capital 
Improvement Program (CIP) for water system capital 
improvement projects (Water System CIP). The proposed 
ordinances are to fund the cost of a regional project, new 
staff, office space, contract services, and other costs 
associated with the Water System CIP. According to Ms. 
Jean Mariani of the PUC, a separate effort is underway to 
develop a similar program for the Clean Water Program. 






According to Mr. Harlan Kelly, Jr. of the PUC, the $3.6 
billion Water System CIP includes 77 water 
infrastructure projects designed to repair, replace and 
seismically upgrade the local and regional water system's 
pipelines, tunnels, reservoirs and dams, to be completed 
over 13 years. The Water System CIP began in FY 2002- 
2003 and will continue through FY 2014-2015 according 
to the present schedule. Mr. Kelly states that projects are 
chosen and prioritized based on the need to reduce risk 
and improve reliability of the regional and local water 
systems. Mr. Kelly further states that the Water System 
CIP is divided into two major improvement programs: the 
37 Regional Water System Projects, and the 40 Local 
Water System Projects. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

20 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Description: 



I 



On November 5, 2002, San Francisco voters approved 
Proposition A, a $1.6 billion bond measure to fund a 
portion of the $3.6 billion Water System CIP, submitted to 
the ballot by the Board of Supervisors. Senate Bill 1870, 
created a Regional Financing Authority (RFA). The RFA, 
comprised of all the regional water system wholesale 
customers and the City and County of San Francisco, may 
issue revenue bonds to fund the 37 Regional Water 
System Projects or may use some other means of 
financing such projects, as described in Attachment I 
(page 1 of 9) provided by Mr. Kelly. 

The proposed supplemental appropriation request (File 
No. 04-0094) would fund (1) the Intertie Project, (2) the 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), (3) 
additional office space for Water System CIP staff, (4) 
additional staff positions for the Water System CIP, and 
(5) services of the Department of Human Resources 
(DHR), the Human Rights Commission (HRC), the 
Department of Public Works (DPW), and the Airport. The 
proposed amendment to the Annual Salary Ordinance 
(File No. 04-0095) would create a total of 15 new positions 
to be funded by the proposed supplemental appropriation 
request. 



Intertie Project: 



The PUC amended the original Water System CIP on 
August 21, 2003, to add a 38 th Regional Water System 
Project, the Intertie Project between the East Bay 
Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and San Francisco's 
water supply system. 

According to Mr. Michael Carlin of the PUC, the Intertie 
Project will provide a connection for the controlled flow of 
water between the East Bay Municipal Utility District 
(EBMUD) and San Francisco's water supply system so 
that 45 million gallons of water per day could be 
transferred from one system to the other. Mr. Carlin 
states that this Intertie Project is necessary in the event 
of (1) a major facility failure due to earthquakes or other 
disasters, and (2) during planned pipeline shutdowns for 
inspection and repair. Mr. Carlin advises that the Intertie 
Project will consist of the construction of a new Pump 
Station at the Hayward Airport, 8,000 linear feet of 36- 
inch diameter pipeline, modifications to the existing City 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

21 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Programmatic 
Environmental Impact 
Report (PEIR): 



of Hayward pipelines and Hesperian Pump Station, and 
improvements at the PUC facilities at Newark Turnout, 
near the City of Newark, Alameda County. 



According to Ms. Kathy How of the PUC, in mid 2003, the 
PUC, in consultation with the City Attorney's Office and 
the Planning Department, determined that the 37 
Regional Projects of the Water System CIP needed an 
overall Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 
(PEIR), in addition to the individual Environmental 
Impact Reports (EIRs), negative declarations, or 
categorical exemptions required for each individual 
project. Ms. How states that the PEIR must be completed 
before project-specific environmental documents for each 
of the 37 Regional Projects can be completed and 
construction of the 37 Regional Projects can begin. The 
PEIR will take approximately 30 months, or 2M> years, to 
complete, according to Ms. How. Ms. How advises that a 
PEIR will address primarily the issues of growth and 
cumulative impacts associated with regional projects that 
would increase the potential reliability and capacity of the 
existing regional water system. Ms. How further advises 
that a PEIR is not required for the 40 Local Water System 
Projects because most of the Local Projects are repair and 
replacement of existing facilities and pipelines. 

As stated in Attachment I, provided by Mr. Kelly: 

"In mid 2003, after consultation with the City 
Attorney's Office and the Planning Department, 
SFPUC determined it needed to prepare a 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) 
for the 37 Regional Projects of the Water System CIP. 
This programmatic approach to the planning of the 
Regional Projects would have caused delays to the 
Water System CIP because the PEIR, which will take 
approximately 30 months to complete, must be 
completed before the 37 Regional Projects commence, 
(page 2 of 9). 

In order to prevent serious delays to the Water System 
CIP, the SFPUC reconfigured the Water System CIP, 
project schedule to: (1) ensure that the PEIR is 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

22 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

completed as early as possible; (2) include the Intertie 
Project to the Water System CIP, which is a Regional 
Project but does not require the completion of the 
PEIR to begin; and (3) advance in the schedule local 
projects, which also do not require the completion of 
the PEIR." (page 3 of 9) 
Additional Office Space, 
Staff and Services of Other 

City Departments: The justification for the additional office space is detailed 

in the Budget Analyst's March 24, 2004 report to the 
Finance and Audits Committee in Item No. 5 (File No. 04- 
0037). 

The PUC staff and services of other City Departments for 
a cost of $1,478,564 requested in this supplemental 
appropriation request (File No. 04-0094) is detailed in 
Comments 23 through 41 of this report. 

The proposed amendment to the FY 2003-2004 Annual 
Salary Ordinance (File No. 04-0095) would create 15 new 
positions (3.75 FTEs for the three month period from 
April 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

23 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

File 04-0095 would amend the FY 2003-2004 Annual Salary Ordinance to create the followin 

new positions 

Table 2: Proposed New Positions 



r 



No. of 
Positions 

(FTE in FY 2003- 

2004) 


Classification 


Title 


Step 1 
(Biweekly- 
Annual) 


Step 5 
(Biweekly- 
Annual) 


Annualized Cost* 
(Step 1- Step 5) 


PEIR and Other Program Planning Efforts 


1 (0.25) 


0941 


Manager VI 


$3,698 
$96,518 


$4,954 
$129,299 




1 (0.25) 


5293 


Planner IV 


$3,041 
$79,370 


$3,696 
$96,466 




1 (0.25) 


5298 


Planner III 
Environmental Review 


$2,564 
$66,920 


$3,117 
$81,354 




1 (0.25) 


5298 


Planner III 
Environmental Review 


$2,564 
$66,920 


$3,117 
$81,354 




1 (0.25) 


5299 


Planner IV 
Environmental Review 


$3,041 
$79,370 


$3,696 
$96,466 




5 (1.25) 




Subtotal 


$14,908 
$389,098 


$18,580 
$484,939 


$463,027 -$577,077 


PUC Water System CIP 


1 (0.25) 


0941 


Manager VI 


$3,698 

$96,518 


$4,954 
$129,299 




1 (0.25) 


0942 


Manager VII 


$3,949 
$103,069 


$5,293 

$138,147 




2 (0.50) 




Subtotal 


$7,647 
$199,587 


$10,247 
$267,446 


$237,509 -$318,261 


Human Rights Commission 


1 (0.25) 


0932 


Manager IV 


$3,194 
$83,363 


$4,280 
$111,708 




1 (0.25) 


2978 


Contract Compliance 
Officer II 


$3,138 
$81,902 


$3,815 
$99,572 




1 (0.25) 


2996 


Human Rights 

Commission 
Representative 


$2,215 
$57,812 


$2,693 
$70,287 




3 (0.75) 




Subtotal 


$8,547 
$223,077 


$10,788 
$281,567 


$265,462 - $335,065 


Department of Human Resources 


1 (0.25) 


1201 


Personnel Technician 
Trainee 


$1,622 
$42,334 


$1,970 

$51,417 




1 (0.25) 


1203 


Personnel Technician 


$1,765 
$46,067 


$2,145 
$55,985 




1 (0.25) 


1241 


Personnel Analyst 


$1,784 
$46,562 


$2,625 
$68,513 




1 (0.25) 


1244 


Senior Personnel 
Analyst 


$2,527 
$65,955 


$3,072 
$80,179 




1 (0.25) 


1244 


Senior Personnel 
Analvst 


$2,527 
$65,955 


$3,072 
$80,179 




5 (1.25) 




Subtotal 


$10,225 
$266,873 


$12,884 
$336,273 


$317,579 -$400,165 


15 (3.75) 




Total 


$1,078,635 


$1,370,225 


$1,283,576- $1,630,568 


* Based on 26. 1 pay periods for FY 2 


904-2005 and including m 


andatory fringe 


benefits calcul 


ated at 19 percent. 



As shown in Table 2 above, the annual cost of the requested 15 positions would range from $1,283,576 at 
Step 1, including salaries of $1,078,635 and fringe benefits of $204,941, to $1,630,568 at Step 5, including 
salaries of $1,370,225 and fringe benefits of $260,343. \^ 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

24 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Budget: 

Table 3: Funding Uses of Supplemental Appropriation Proposed 

Expenditures 



Funding Uses: 




Amount 


Intertie Project 






Consultants 








Feasibility Report (Carollo Engineers) 


$9,000 




Initial Environmental Study (ESA) 


12,500 




Design (Carollo Engineers) 


632,000 


Less 


Previous Appropriated Funds for the Intertie Project 


(653,500) 




Construction Contractor (not yet selected) 


7,790,000 


Citv Staff 








Construction Management (PUC existing positions) 


610.000 




Total Intertie Project: 


$8,400,000 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

25 



Programmatic Hinvironmental Impact Report (PEIR) 




Consultants 




PEIR Consultant (ESA + Orion, Joint Venture) 


$2,500,000 


Contract Consultant Planning Services 


655,005 


Citv Staff 




PUC and Planning Staff (includes funding for 10 existing positions and 5 




new positions, 1.25 FTE for FY 2003-2004) 


1.521.995 


Total PEIR: 


$4,677,000 



Additional Office Space, Staff, and Services of Other City Departments 




Rent of 30,790 square feet at 1145 Market Street for 3.6 months 


$231,244 


Remodehng and Cubicles 


724,528 


Furniture 


426,162 


Network Equipment 


141,002 


Computers 


235,200 


DTIS Telephone and Computer Network Work Order for 1145 Market Street 


306,372 


Other Office Supplies 


24,000 


Other Materials and Supplies 


25,229 


Space Planning (DPW) 


50.000 




$2,163,737 


PUC Positions (includes 2 new positions, 0.5 FTE for FY 2003-2004) 


$81,582 


DHR Work Order (includes 5 new positions, 1.25 FTE for FY 2003-2004) 


484,713 


HRC Work Order (includes 3 new positions, 0.75 FTE for FY 2003-2004) 


263,000 


Airport Work Order 


125,186 


DPW Work Order - General Administration 


524.083 




$1,478,564 


Total Additional Office Space, Staff, and Sendees of Other 




City Departments: 


$3,642,301 


Total (includes 15 new positions representing 3.75 FTEs for FY 2003-2004): 


$16,719,301 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Funding Sources: 



1. The proposed supplemental appropriation request 
(File No. 04-0094) contained the following inaccuracies: 

• It incorrectly described the funding sources. 

• Did not identify a funding source in all cases. 

• The PEIR was called the "Program Environmental 
Impact Report Improvements," instead of the 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Report" and the 
East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) was 
called the East Bay Municipal Utili ties District. 

• The Intertie Project was described as between 
EBMUD and San Francisco's waste system, instead of 
San Francisco's water system. 

Based on the Budget Analyst's identification of these 
inaccuracies, the Controller's Office prepared an 
Amendment of the Whole to correct the funding sources. 

Ms. Jean Mariani of the PUC advises that the PUC will 
recommend additional minor amendments in order to 
correct typographic errors at the March 24, 2004 Finance 
and Audits Committee meeting. 

2. According to Mr. Kelly, $4,677,000 of Proposition A 
Bond Funds 1 which were previously appropriated by the 
Board of Supervisors for specific projects for the Water 
System CIP, would be reappropriated for the PEIR and 
PUC and Planning Department staff to work on the PEIR 
and other program planning efforts, described below. 
Attachment I to this report lists these projects for which 
the $4,677,000 were previously appropriated, and 
describes the status of those projects (page 4 of 9). 

3. According to Mr. Kelly, $3,642,301 of PUC operating 
budget recoveries from overhead charges to Water System 
CIP projects would be used to fund additional office space, 
staff and services of other City departments. In 
Attachment I, Mr. Kelly states: 



1 According to Ms. Mariani, no Proposition A Bonds have been issued to date. The PUC is funding 
capital improvement projects on a short term basis using commercial paper proceeds as previously 
authorized by the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Mariani advises that, ultimately, the long term funding 
for these projects will be Proposition A Bond Funds because the commercial paper indebtedness will 
be refunded with Proposition A Bond Funds. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISOR S 

BUDGET ANALYST 

26 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

"Overhead to PUC capital projects is comprised of 
those expenses that cannot be directly allocated to a 
specific capital project but that are appropriate costs 
associated with the overall management and support 
of SFPUC capital projects within the Infrastructure 
Division. These costs are estimated each year in the 
SFPUC budget and then adjusted based on actual 
spending each quarter." 

Intertie Project: 4. Attachment I to this report, describes the PUC's April 

21, 2003 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with 
EBMUD and the City of Hayward, which established that 
the PUC and EBMUD would each pay for 50 percent of 
the costs of the Intertie Project, which has a total cost of 
$18,107,000 (pages 4-6 of 9). The PUC's cost is therefore 
$9,053,500, of which $8,400,000 would be funded by the 
proposed supplemental appropriation. The balance of the 
PUC's cost of $653,500 was previously funded in the FY 
2003-2004 budget. Mr. Carlin states that the City of 
Hayward is serving as the lead agency for the Intertie 
Project and is contributing the right-of-way use of the 
City of Hayward's existing water pipelines and 
engineering support. Mr. Carlin further advises that as 
lead agency, the City of Hayward is responsible for the 
selection process, contract award and contract 
administration for all consultants and construction 
contractors used on the Intertie Project. Mr. Carlin 
advises that the PUC does not maintain detailed records 
of the City of Hayward's selection process and contract 
awards for the Intertie Project because the City of 
Hayward is the lead agency. 

Mr. Donn Furman of the City Attorney's Office states that 
he has approved as to form the MOU between the City, 
EBMUC, and the City of Hayward. Mr. Furman states 
that the MOU designates Haj^ward as the lead agency for 
purposed of this joint power agreement, and that the 
agreement adequately protects the City. According to Mr. 
Furman, the MOU is not subject to Board of Supervisors 
approval. 

The Budget Analyst recommends approval of the Intertie 
Project. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

27 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Programmatic 
Environmental 
Impact Report (PEIR): 



5. Mr. Carlin states that the construction contractor 
will be selected through a competitive bid process, 
administered by the City of Hayward. Mr. Carlin states 
that the City of Hayward will issue the request for bids in 
May of 2004 and construction is anticipated to begin in 
June of 2004. Mr. Carlin advises that the City of Hayward 
will award this contract to the lowest responsive bidder. 
Mr. Carlin advises that because the City of Hayward is 
responsible for selection process, contract award and 
contract administration for this contract, this contract 
will be subject to the federal, state, and City of Hayward 
rules which govern contracts but will not be subject to the 
City and County of San Francisco's rules and regulations. 

6. In Attachment I, the PUC has included a detailed 
accounting of the $610,000 of PUC Construction 
Management costs including hours and hourly rates, 
which will be performed by existing staff at the PUC 
(page 6 of 9). Mr. Carlin advises that the PUC's 
construction management work would begin when actual 
construction begins. 



7. Attachment I explains that "the inclusion of the 
PEIR is not only necessary but will provide an overview of 
future projects, address system-wide objectives, and 
streamline future CEQA [California Environmental 
Quality Act] review of projects." 

8. As shown in Table 3 above, the PUC is requesting 
$4,677,000 for the Regional Water System Projects PEIR: 
(a) $2,500,000 for a PEIR consultant, ESA + Orion Joint 
Venture, (b) a $655,005 consultant contract (contract to be 
furnished through the Program Management Contract 
(PMC) Services portion of the existing Water 
Infrastructure Partners (WIP) contract, as explained in 
Comment No. 11) for planning services, and (c) planning, 
environmental review and scheduling, and program 
control work performed by the PUC and the Planning 
Department, in the amount of $1,521,995. According to 
Ms. How, the requested $4,677,000 does not represent the 
anticipated total cost of the PEIR, which has not yet been 
fully determined. However, additional costs for the project 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

28 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

would be subject to future Board of Supervisors 
appropriation approval. 

PEIR Consultant 

Contracts: 9. As stated in Attachment I to this report, the PUC 

issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) on October 9, 2003 
for a consultant to complete the PEIR. Ms. How advises 
that this RFP was advertised on the City website for 
contracts and two firms responded. As described in 
Attachment I: 

"The selection was based on review of written 
proposals, and oral presentations and responses to 
questions prepared by SFPUC staff. The selection 
panehsts included one representative each from 
BAWSCA [Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation 
Agency] and the Santa Clara Valley Water District 
and three representatives from within the City. 
Weight (in scoring) was not given to the cost proposal. 
The selection panel did not see cost proposals (in 
sealed envelopes until after selection of consultant). 
The consultant selected for negotiations of a contract 
with the SFPUC is ESA + Orion Environmental 
Associates, Joint Venture." (page 8 of 9) 

According to Ms. How, cost was not a factor in the 
selection of ESA + Orion, Joint Venture, because cost is 
not a rating factor for selection of professional service 
contracts, such as architecture and engineering services. 

10. As of the writing of this report, the PUC could not 
provide a detailed scope of work and budget, including 
hours and hourly rates, for the proposed contract 
estimated to cost $2,500,000 with ESA + Orion, Joint 
Venture. However, Ms. How states that, "while the hours 
for the ESA + Orion, Joint Venture have not been 
estimated by task, the consultant contract is expected to 
be for a duration of 30 months and is expected not to 
exceed $2.5 million. Certification of the contract and 
notice-to-proceed is anticipated to be in March of 2004, 
after approval of this supplemental appropriation 
request." In the professional judgement of the Budget 
Analyst, the information the PUC provided, combined 
with the importance of the timely completion of the PEIR 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

for the 37 Regional Projects, is sufficient justification for 
the Board of Supervisors to appropriate $2,500,000 for the 
contract with ESA + Orion, Joint Venture to prepare the 
PEIR. The Budget Analyst recommends approval of 
$2,500,000 for this purpose. 

11. As shown in Table 3 above, the PUC is requesting 
$655,005 for a contractor to prepare engineering 
alternatives necessary for the PEIR. Attachment I 
includes a budget for this $655,005, which includes hours 
and hourly rates (page 7 of 9). According to Ms. How, the 
consultant services required to prepare such engineering 
alternatives will be furnished through the contract with 
Water Infrastructure Partners (WIP) which includes the 
provision of Project Management Contract (PMC) Services 
which are funded through various capital improvement 
project appropriations. Ms. How advises that this 
$655,005 contract is within the existing PMC Services 
contract authority for WIP as approved by the Board of 
Supervisors on March 16, 2004 (File No. 03-1975). Ms. 
How confirms that the preparation of engineering 
alternatives for the PEIR, services to be provided by "WIP, 
will be completed by December 21, 2004 when the WIP 
contract is scheduled to expire. The Budget Analyst 
recommends approval of the $655,005 contract to prepare 
engineering alternatives for the PEIR. 

Existing City Staff to 

Support the PEIR and 

Other Program Planning: 12. As shown in Table 3 above, the PUC is requesting 

$1,521,995 for planning, environmental review, and 
scheduling and program control work performed by the 
PUC and the Planning Department for the PEIR and 
other program planning efforts to facilitate 
implementation of the CIP in FY 2003-2004. Included in 
this $1,521,995, is $1,374,505 in funding for 10 existing 
PUC staff positions, whose salaries and benefits will be 
charged to the PEIR. 

13. According to Ms. How, these 10 existing PUC staff 
positions were authorized and funded in the FY 2003- 
2004 budget, but the reappropriation of the funds for 
these positions is required because these positions were 
authorized for the Regional Projects portion of the Water 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

30 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



System CIP, which is on hold, pending the completion of 
the PEIR. Ms. How states that the Controller has advised 
the PUC that the PUC cannot transfer salary funds 
between Water System CIP projects, without first 
obtaining approval from the Board of Supervisors. 
According to Ms. Monique Zmuda of the Controller's 
Office: 

"While Administrative Code Section 3.18 allows for 
surplus transfers under certain circumstance and 
requires the reporting of transfers over 10 percent, the 
Controller's Office does not approve surplus transfers 
where there appears to be a policy interest on the part 
of the Board of Supervisors. For example, we would 
not approve a surplus transfer to create a new project 
or substantially change the characteristics of an 
existing project. Since the PUC's CIP program has 
been the topic of considerable discussion at the Board 
of Supervisors, we conclude they have a policy interest 
in this project and would not approve surplus transfers 
in these projects unless they were clearly 
administrative in nature." 

The proposed supplemental appropriation request would 
therefore reassign existing positions to the PEIR Project. 

14. Attachment I shows details of the $1,521,995 for the 
position classifications, hours worked, and rates for the 
planning, environmental review, and scheduling and 
program control work by the PUC for the PEIR and other 
program planning efforts (page 7 of 9). Ms. How states 
that: 

"PUC staff time under this request is to prepare the 
Request for Proposal for the PEIR; work on consultant 
selection and negotiations : develop program 
alternatives, or project bundles, for the PEIR; develop 
the strategy document for the program (and projects in 
the Regional Water System); update and monitor both 
the overall program schedule as well as the regional 
project schedules; and [would be responsible for] 
communicating with BAWSCA and other agencies 
regarding progress on the tasks." 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

31 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

15. Based on the scope of work described above which 
includes preparing the RFP for the PEIR and work on 
consultant selection and negotiations, a portion of the 
existing PUC's staff time, at a cost of $1,374,505, has 
already been expended to date for the PEIR project. Ms. 
How states that approximately $400,000 of the requested 
$1,374,505 has been expended since July 1, 2003. 
Therefore, the Budget Anabyst recommends that the 
proposed ordinance be amended for retroactivity. 

Request for New 

Positions to Support the 

PEIR and Other Program 

Planning Efforts: 16. In addition to the planning, environmental review, 

and scheduling and program control work performed by 
existing PUC staff at a cost of $1,374,505, the PUC is 
requesting $147,490 for five new positions for three 
months of FY 2003-2004 for the PEIR and other program 
planning efforts to facilitate implementation of the Water 
System CIP. The proposed new positions are not limited 
to the 30 month period required to complete the PEIR, 
but, according to Ms. How, will be required throughout 
the planning process of the Water System CIP which will 
take a minimum of 10 years. As shown in Table 2 above 
and explained in Attachments II and III, prepared by Ms. 
Elaine Lee and Mr. Robert Pritchard of DHR, these five 
new positions are: 

• A classification 0941 Manager VI (Manager of 
Program Development Coordination) to "be responsible 
for managing and coordinating the operations of the 
San Francisco Regional Water System." This position 
would receive a salary ranging from $96,518 to 
$129,299 per year, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 

• A classification 5293 Planner IV position, to "plan, 
administer, and direct the activities of a project group 
engaged in the environmental review and permitting 
process for the implementation of the San Francisco 
Public Utilities Commission's regional projects that 
are a part of the Capital Improvement Program." This 
position would receive a salary ranging from $79,370 
to $96,466 per year, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 

• A classification 5299 Planner IV Environmental 
Review position, to be in the PUC's budget but 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

32 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



assigned to the Planning Department, to "supervise 
office staff engaged in the preparation and review of 
Environmental Impact Reports and environmental 
evaluations on both the SFPUC Capital Improvement 
Program, and the specific projects that make up the 
Capital Improvement Program, to insure comphance 
with the California Environmental Quality Act, the 
San Francisco Administrative Code and other 
governmental regulations and guidelines." This 
position would receive a salary ranging from $79,370 
to $96,466 per year, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 
• Two classification 5298 Planner III positions, to be in 
the PUC's budget but assigned to the Planning 
Department, to "manage and coordinate all necessary 
activities required for the production and completion of 
the Environmental Impact Reports, Negative 
Declarations and Categorical Exemptions for specific 
projects within the CIP." These two positions each 
receive a salary ranging from $66,920 to $81,354 per 
year each, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 

17. Based on inquires of the Budget Analyst, Ms. 
Mariani advises that the PUC is withdrawing its request 
for the 5293 Planner IV position. Therefore, the Budget 
Analyst recommends that the proposed supplemental 
appropriation request be reduced by $28,699, the cost of 
this new position for three months (File No. 04-0094), and 
that this position be deleted from the proposed 
amendment to the FY 2003-2004 Annual Salary 
Ordinance (File No. 04-0095). 

18. With regard to the 0941 Manager VI, Manager of 
Project Development Coordination position, the Budget 
Analyst has reviewed the PUC's existing budgeted 
positions and DHRs position analysis, and concludes that 
adding this 0941 Manager VI, Manager of Program 
Development Coordination is justified. 

Ms. Mariani advises that the requisition for this 0941 
Manager VI, Manager of Program Development 
Coordination is complete and the PUC will fill this 
position by approximately May 15, 2004 should this 
position be approved by the Board of Supervisors. 
However, the Budget Analyst notes that the proposed 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



supplemental appropriation requests salary and 
mandatory fringe benefits funds this position from April 
1, 2004 through June 30, 2004. Therefore, the Budget 
Analyst recommends that the funding for the position be 
reduced from $38,466 to $19,233, or by $19,233 2 , to reflect 
the PUC's anticipated hire date for this position. 

19. As stated in Attachment II, the 5299 Planner IV 
Environmental Review position would "supervise office 
staff engaged in the preparation and review of 
Environmental Impact Reports and environmental 
evaluations to insure compliance with the California 
Environmental Quality Act, the San Francisco 
Administrative Code and other governmental regulations 
and guidelines." Mr. Cariin states that the 5299 Planner 
IV Environmental Review position would review the more 
complex Environmental Impact Reports prepared by 
consultants and insure compliance with the California 
Environmental Quality Act, the San Francisco 
Administrative Code and other governmental regulations 
and guidelines for the 77 local and regional CIP projects. 

20. The Budget Analyst has reviewed the PUC's existing 
budgeted positions, DHR's position analysis, and the 
PUC's justification for the 5299 Planner IV 
Environmental Review position, and finds that adding 
this 5299 Planner IV Environmental Review position is 
justified. 

Ms. How advises that the requisition for this 5299 
Planner IV Environmental Review position is complete 
and the PUC will fill this position by approximately June 
5, 2004 and assign this position to the Planning 
Department. However, the Budget Analyst notes that the 
proposed supplemental appropriation requests salary and 
mandatory fringe benefits funds for this position from 
April 1, 2004 to June 30, 2004. Therefore, the Budget 
Analyst recommends that the funding for the position be 
reduced from $28,697 to $9,566, or by $19,131, to reflect 
the PUC's anticipated hire date for this position. 



2 The requested 15 positions described in Table I were budgeted at Step 5 and included 19 percent 
for mandatory fringe benefits. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

21. According to Mr. Carlin, and as described in 
Attachment IV: 

"In preliminary conversations with the City Planning 
Department, SFPUC understood that the City 
Planning Department had vacant positions that could 
be used to support the SFPUC environmental review 
requirements. Subsequent conversations revealed that 
City Planning did not have surplus vacant positions. 
Thus, the SFPUC is creating three [two Planner III 
and one Planner IV] positions in our budget and will 
detail the positions to the City Planning Department." 

The Planning Department's FY 2003-2004 budget 
includes 11.0 FTE 5298 Planner III positions, of which, 
according to Mr. Costolino Hogan of the Planning 
Department, two have been vacant for over 18 months 
due to budgetary constraints. 

Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends funding the 
two existing 5298 Planner III positions at the Planning 
Department through a work order with the PUC as part 
of the FY 2004-2005 budget. Further, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that (1) File No. 04-0095 be amended to 
delete the creation of two new 5298 Planner III positions, 
and (2) File No. 04-0095 be reduced by the cost of these 
two 5298 Planner III positions for three months, or by 
$48,406. 

Additional Office Space- 
Staff, and Services of 

Other Citv Departments: 22. The justification and $2,385,471 budget for 

additional office space is discussed in the Budget Analyst 
report on Item No. 5 (File No. 04-0037). Of this $2,385,471 
budget, $2,163,737 is funded by the subject supplemental 
appropriation request, and $221,734 was previously 
funded in the FY 2003-2004 PUC budget. Based on the 
issues raised in that report, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that the Finance and Audits Committee: 

• Reduce rental costs budgeted for 5 months from 
$231,244 to $128,292, or by $102,952 to reflect the 
correct estimated May 1, 2004 lease commencement 

date. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

• Reduce furniture costs from $426,162 to $318,711, or 
by $107,451 to reflect a more reasonable estimate of 
such furniture costs. 

Additional PUC Staff: 23. As shown in Table 2 above and described in 

Attachment III, the PUC is requesting the following 
additional two positions for the Water System CIP: 

• A classification 0941 Manager VI, Director of 
Workforce Development, to be "responsible for 
planning, organizing, directing assisting in all aspects 
of internal and external workforce development." This 
position would receive a salary ranging from $96,518 
to $129,299 per year, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 

• A classification 0942 Manager VII, Manager of 
Program Development and Support Bureau, to be 
"responsible for providing the strategic vision, 
comprehensive planning efforts and technical support 
for the Infrastructure Division, oversees all program 
efforts, including development of program strategy and 
coordination for approval/adoption of the 
Program [matic] Environmental Impact Report 
([P]EIR) and other project specific EIRs." This position 
would receive a salary ranging from $103,069 to 
$138,147 per year, plus mandatory fringe benefits. 

24. Based on inquiries of the Budget Analyst, Ms. 
Mariani advises that the PUC is withdrawing its request 
for the 0941 Manager VI Manager of Workforce 
Development position. Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that the proposed supplemental 
appropriation request be reduced by $35,849 ($32,325 in 
Permanent Salaries and $3,524 in Mandatory Fringe 
Benefits, the cost of this new position for three months, 
(File No. 04-0094), and that this position be deleted from 
the amendment to the FY 2003-2004 Annual Salary 
Ordinance (File No. 04-0095). 

25. The Budget Analyst has reviewed the PUC's existing 
budgeted positions, DHR's position analysis, and the 
PUC's justification for the 0942 Manager VII, Manager of 
Program Development and Support Bureau, and finds 
that adding this 0942 Manager VII position is justified. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Ms. Mariani advises that the requisition for this 0942 
Manager VII position is completed and the PUC will fill 
this position by approximately April 15, 2004. However, 
the proposed supplemental appropriation request includes 
funds for this position from April 1, 2004 through June 
30, 2004. Also, the proposed supplemental appropriation 
request has incorrectly over-budgeted Permanent Salaries 
and Mandatory Fringe Benefits for the two subject 
positions. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends 
that File No. 04-0094 be amended so that the funding for 
this position is reduced by $7,500 ($5,123 in Permanent 
Salaries, and $2,377 in miscalculated Mandatory Fringe 
Benefits) to correct errors and reflect the PUC's 
anticipated hire date for this position. Recommended 
reductions for these two positions (Comment Nos. 24 and 
25) total $43,349 ($37,448 in reduced Permanent Salaries 
and $5,901 in reduced Mandatory Fringe Benefits). 

Additional Service of 

Other City Departments: 26. DHR Work Order: As shown in Table 3 above, the 

proposed supplemental appropriation request includes 
$484,713 in increased funding for an existing work order 
to DHR. According to Mr. Jamie Austin of DHR, this work 
order is for DHR to provide the Water System CIP 
program with continuous testing services, classification 
studies, training, recruitment, employee relations, and 
certifications of appointments. 

27. The original PUC work order with DHR in FY 2003- 
2004 was for $280,000. There are two components to the 
proposed increase to the DHR work order of $484,713: (a) 
non-labor costs for professional service contracts, and 
advertising, travel, and materials and supplies to support 
testing services of $194,650, and (b) labor costs of 
$290,063. Funding for this work order for FY 2003-2004 
would therefore total $764,713 if the subject request is 
approved. 

28. Based on inquires of the Budget Analyst, as shown in 
Attachment V, provided by Mr. Austin, DHR has 
concluded that the additional work order request of 
$484,713 should be reduced to $185,793, or by $298,920. 
Accordingly, the Budget Analyst recommends that the 
proposed supplemental appropriation request be reduced 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



by $298,920 from $484,713 to $185,793 (see Comment No. 
33). 

29. This reduced amount of $185,793 includes (a) 
$100,000 for a professional services contract to conduct a 
Utilization Study for Technical Engineers, (2) $40,000 for 
a professional services contract to recruit highly technical 
classifications, and (3) $45,793 for advertising, travel, and 
materials and supplies to support testing services. 
Attachment V includes a budget for these advertising, 
travel and materials and supplies costs of $45,793. 

30. According to Mr. Geoffrey Rothman of DHR, 
Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 to the Memorandum of 
Understanding between the International Federation of 
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21 and the 
City and County of San Francisco (File No. 04-0181, 
passed on first reading by the Board of Supervisors on 
March 16, 2004) includes a provision that the City 
contract with an independent consultant to conduct the 
Utilization Study for Technical Engineers. Mr. Rothman 
advises that because DHR has not yet issued a Request 
for Proposals (RFP), DHR does not have any details 
regarding this professional services contract, such as the 
scope of work, and a budget, including hours and hourly 
rates. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that 
the proposed supplemental appropriation request be 
reduced by $100,000, from $185,793 to $85,983, and that 
DHR should submit a request for the additional balance 
needed in the FY 2004-2005 budget or in a supplemental 
appropriation request when contract details are known. 

31. DHR advises that due to delays in the recruitment 
process for Water Systems CIP employees, the $40,000 
requested for a professional services contract to recruit 
highly technical classifications is no longer needed in FY 
2003-2004. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends 
that the proposed supplemental appropriation request be 
reduced by the entire $40,000, from $85,793 to $45,793. 

32. As shown in Table 2 above, the PUC is requesting 5 
new DHR positions (1.25 FTE in FY 2003-2004) so that 
DHR can provide the PUC with continuous testing 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

38 



fl 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



services, classification studies, recruitment of employees, 
and certify appointments. 

Attachment VI to this report, provided by Ms. Lee, 
explains the need for an additional 1203 Personnel 
Technician position to provide technical and clerical 
support for the existing DHR staff dedicated to PUC 
work. The Budget Analyst has reviewed DHR's existing 
budgeted positions, and DHR's justification for this 
position, and concludes that adding this 1203 Personnel 
Technician is justified. 

Ms. Lee advises that the requisition for this 1203 
Personnel Technician position is complete and DHR will 
fill this position by approximately May 1, 2004 should this 
position be approved by the Board of Supervisors. 
However, the Budget Analyst notes that the proposed 
supplemental appropriation requests salary and 
mandatory fringe benefits from this position from April 1, 
2004 through June 30, 2004. Therefore, the Budget 
Analyst recommends that the funding for the position be 
reduced from $16,592 to $10,619, or by $5,973, to reflect 
DHR's anticipated hire date for this position. 

33. Regarding the other requested four positions, the 1201 
Personnel Technician Trainee, the 1241 Personnel 
Analyst, and the two 1244 Senior Personnel Analyst 
positions, the Budget Analyst notes that the DHR (1) has 
only provided preliminary review and approval two of 
these four positions, and (2) states that none of these four 
positions could be hired before July of 2004. Further, the 
PUC and DHR have not fully justified the need for these 
four new positions. 

Given the absence of a full justification for these four 
positions, budgeted at $178,058 for the balance of FY 
2003-2004 ($194,650 for all five positions less $16,592 for 
the 1203 Personnel Technician which is being 
recommended for approval by the Budget Analyst), the 
Budget Analyst recommends that the Finance and Audits 
Committee (1) disapprove the requested 1201 Personnel 
Technician Trainee, the 1241 Personnel Analyst, and the 
two 1244 Senior Personnel Analyst positions and delete 
these new positions in the proposed amendment to the FY 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



2003-2004 Annual Salary Ordinance (File No. 04-0095). 
The $178,058 reduction for these positions has been 
included in the Budget Analyst's recommendation to 
delete $298,920 previously discussed in Comment No. 28, 
above. 

Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommended reductions 
for the DHR work order totals $444,893 (Comment Nos. 
28, 30, 31 and 32). 

34. HRC Work Order : As shown in Table 3 above, the 
PUC is requesting an additional $263,000 for a work 
order to the HRC to fund (a) $101,323 for existing HRC 
staff positions for work on the PUC's contract compliance 
issues, and $161,677 to create three new positions (0.75 
FTE for FY 2003-2004). Based on inquires of the Budget 
Analyst, Ms. Virginia Harmon of HRC advises that the 
$161,677 for new HRC positions was incorrectly budgeted, 
and should have been $86,576 for three new positions, or 
$75,101 less than the amount requested. Therefore, the 
Budget Analyst recommends that the HRC work order be 
reduced by $75,101, from $263,000 to $187,899. 

Ms. Harmon states that the PUC has an existing work 
order for $671,894 with the HRC in the FY 2003-2004 
budget, which funds eight existing positions. Ms. Harmon 
advises that this work order of $671,894 did not fully fund 
the eight existing positions working on PUC contracts and 
that the requested $101,323 will cover the shortfall. 

35. With respect to the $86,576 3 requested for three new 
positions (0.75 in FY 2003-2004), Attachment III explains 
that the requested 0932 Manager IV, Contract 
Compliance Manager for Infrastructure position would: 

"Audit, evaluate, plan and implement the staffing 
an[d] activities for the contract compliance group 
serving three major departments, the Public Utilities 
Commission, the Department of Public Works and 
the Recreation and Parks Department. ... This 
position will perform special projects, including the 
full development and implementation of a 
Disadvantage Business Enterprise Program to 



3 The HRC has budgeted mandatory fringe benefits for these positions at 22.9 percent. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 



BUDGEXq ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



provide work opportunities for disadvantaged 
business." 

According to Ms. Mariani, 75 percent of the work load for 
this positions will be related to the PUC and that the 
funding for this position would be shared between the 
PUC (75 percent), DPW (20 percent) and the Recreation 
and Park Department (5 percent) in FY 2004-2005. The 
Budget Analyst believes that successful MBE and WBE 
participation in contracts for the Water Systems CIP is 
crucial to the success of the program. However, the Water 
Infrastructure Partners (WIP) contract, which will be 
completed by December 21, 2004, includes in the scope of 
work "achieve Human Rights Commission goals for MBE 
and WBE participation in construction contracts." 
Therefore, funding this position before December 21, 2004 
would be adding additional resources to this effort which 
WIP is already contracted to complete. 

The Budget Analyst considers the decision of whether to 
add additional resources of a new 0932 Manager D7 
position for this effort to be a policy decision for the Board 
of Supervisors. Should the Board of Supervisors decide to 
approve this position, funding should be reduced by 
$11,449 from $34,348 to $22,899 to reflect a May 1, 2004 
anticipated hire date, rather than the budgeted April 1, 
2004 hire date. 

36. With regard to the other requested two new positions 
for the HRC, the 2978 Contract Compliance Officer II and 
the 2996 Human Rights Commission Representative, 
HRC has not: 

• Fully justified the need for two new positions in terms 
of contract work for the PUC in May and June of 2004. 

• Provided a vacancy list for existing positions. 

• Provided requisition requests or other evidence that 
HRC could hire these two new positions within the FY 
2003-2004 budget year. 

Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that the 
proposed supplemental appropriation request be reduced 
by $52,228 to eliminate funding for these two new 
positions (File No. 04-0094), and that the two new 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



positions for HRC (0.75 FTE in FY 2003-2004) not be 
included in the FY 2003-2004 Annual Salary Ordinance 
(File No. 04-0095). 

37. Therefore, the recommended reductions for the HRC 
work order totals $161,677 if, as a policy decision the 
Board of Supervisors does not approve the 0932 Manager 
IV position, and $138,778, or $22,899 more, if the Board of 
Supervisors does approve the 0932 Manager IV position 
(Comment Nos. 34 - 36). 

38. Airport: As shown in Table 3 above, the PUC is 
requesting $125,186 for a work order to the Airport to 
fund one 0933 Manager V position from January 1, 2004 
through June 30, 2004. Mr. Kelly states that the duties of 
this position include developing the operating budget, 
facilities management, purchasing, contract support, and 
document control. According to Mr. Kelly, this position is 
in the Airport budget but has been assigned to the PUC 
since May of 2002. Mr. Kelly advises that this position 
was funded by a work order in the FY 2003-2004 budget 
from July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003. 

Mr. Kelly advises that the PUC work ordered to the 
Airport only 50 percent of the cost of the position because 
the PUC had planned to make this position a PUC 
position beginning January 1, 2004. Instead the PUC is 
requesting an additional work order to the Airport and 
will include this position in the PUC budget in FY 2004- 
2005. 

39. The Budget Analyst notes that this 0933 Manager V 
position costs $143,089 annually, including fringe 
benefits. Therefore, the cost of this position from January 
1, 2004 through June 30, 2004 would cost $71,544. The 
Budget Analyst therefore recommends that the proposed 
supplemental appropriation request be amended to (1) 
reduce the Airport work order from $125,186 to $71,544, 
or by $53,642, and provide for retroactivity. 

40. DPW Work Orders: As shown in Table 3 above, the 
PUC is requesting $524,083 to work order to DPW for 
existing staff to implement a project management and 
control system that will include automated time entry; 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

42 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

coordinated timekeeping, scheduling and accounting 
functions. Attachment VII to this report, provided by Ms. 
Tina Olson of the DPW, is a budget, which includes hours 
and hourly rates, for this $524,083. 

41. The DPW work order of $524,083 is for labor costs of 
existing staff positions. According to Ms. Olson, of this 
$524,083 in labor costs, $349,400 was charged from July 
1, 2004 to date. Therefore, the Budget Analyst 
recommends that the proposed supplemental 
appropriation request be amended to provide for 
retroactivity. 

42. According to Ms. Mariani, the PUC, the Planning 
Department, DHR, HRC, the Airport and DPW are all in 
agreement with the Budget Analyst's recommendations. 

Summary: The Budget Analyst's recommendations are summarized 

in Tables 4 and 5 on the following pages. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

43 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Table 4: Summary of Budget Analyst's Recommendations for the Proposed 
Supplemental Appropriation (File 04-0094) 







Budget 


Budget 








Analyst's 


Analyst's 






Budget 


Recommend- 


Recommended 




Funding Use 


Proposal 


ation 


Reduction 


Comments 


Intertie Project 


88,400,000 


88,400,000 







PEIR Project 


4,677,000 


4,561,531 


$115,469 

Comment Nos. 

17, 18, 20, 21 


Reduce the 0941 Manager VI, Manager of 
Program Development Coordination 
position ($19,233) and the 5299 Planner IV 
Environmental Review position ($19,131) 
to reflect the anticipated hire date. Delete 
a 5293 Planner IV, ($28,699). Delete the 
two 5298 Planner III ($48,406) positions. 


Additional Office Space: 






Comment No. 22 




1145 Market Street rent 


231,244 


128,292 


102,952 


Reduce rent costs to reflect accurate lease 
commencement date ($102,952). See Item 
No. 5 (File 04-0037) 


Remodeling and Cubicles 


724,528 


724,528 





Approve 


Furniture 


426. 1G2 


318,711 


107,451 


Reduce furniture costs to reflect 
reasonable costs ($107,451). See Item No. 5 
(File 04-0037) 


Network Equipment 


141,002 


141,002 


Comment No. 22 


Approve 


Computers 


235,200 


235,200 





Approve 


DTIS Work Order 


306,372 


306,372 





Approve 


Other Office Supplies 


24,000 


24,000 





Approve 


Other Materials & Supplies 


25,229 


25,229 





Approve 


Space Planning (DPW) 


50,000 


50.000 





Approve 












Additional Staff and Servic 


es of Other Departments: 






PUC Positions 


81,582 


38,233 


43,349 

Comment Nos. 

24 and 25 


Delete a 0941 Manager VI, Manager of 
Workforce Development, position ($35,849, 
$32,325 in Permanent Salaries and $3,524 
in Mandatory Fringe Benefits). Reduce 
the 0942 Manager VH, Manager of 
Program Development and Support 
Bureau, position to reflect the anticipated 
hire date and correct errors ($7,500, $5,123 
in Permanent Salaries and $2,377 in 
Mandatory Fringe Benefits). 


DHR Work Order 


484,713 


39,820 


444,893 

Comment Nos. 

28, 30, 31, 32, 33. 


Professional service contracts were not 
justified ($140,000), salary and fringes for 
four of the new positions which are not 
fully justified and non-labor costs which 
were overbudgeted ($298,920), 1201 
Personnel Technician Trainee position 
budgeted using an incorrect hire date 
($5,973). 


HRC Work Order 


263,000 


124,222 


138,778* 

Comment Nos. 

34, 35, 36, 37 


The position costs were budgeted 
incorrectly ($75,101), two requested new 
position were not. fully justified ($52,228), 
and hire date for 0932 Manager IV position 
incorrect ($11,449). 


Airport Work Order 


125,186 


71,544 


53,642 
Comment No. 39 


Reduce to the actual position cost 
($53,642). 


DPW Work Order 


524,083 


524,083 







TOTAL: 


$16,719,301 


$15,712,767 


$1,006,534 1 



*If the Board of Supervisors disapproves the 0932 Manager IV position, further cost savings of 
$22,899 would result (Comment No. 35). 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

44 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Table 5: Summary of Budget Analyst's Recommendations for the Proposed 
Amendment to the Annual Salary Ordinance (File 04-0095) 







No. of Positions 


Policy Decision 






Classification 


Title 


Requested (FTE 
in FY 2003-2004) 


for the Board of 
Supervisors) 


Approve 


Disapprove 


PEIR 












0941 


Manager VI 


1 (0.25) 




1 (0.25) 




5293 


Planner IV 


1 (0.25) 






1 (0.25) 


5298 


Planner III Environmental Review 


2 (0.50) 






2 (0.50) 


5299 


Planner IV Environmental Review 


1 (0.25) 




1 (0.25) 




PUC Water System 


CIP 










0941 


Manager VI 


1 (0.25) 






1 (0.25) 


0942 


Manager VII 


1 (0.25) 




1 (0.25) 




HRC Work Order 












0932 


Manager IV 


1 (0.25) 


1 (0.251 






2978 


Compliance Officer II 


1 (0.25) 







1 (0.25) 


2996 


HRC Representative 


1 (0.25) 







1 (0.25) 


DHR Work Order 












1201 


Personnel Technician Trainee 


1 (0.25) 






1 (0.25) 


1203 


Personnel Technician 


1 (0.25) 




1 (0.25) 




1241 


Personnel Analyst 


1 (0.25) 






1 (0.25) 


1244 


Senior Personnel Analyst 


2 (0.50) 







2 (0.50) 


TOTAL: 




15 (3.75) 


1 (0.25) 


4 (1.00) 


10 (2.50) 



Recommendations: 



In summary the Budget Analyst recommends the 
proposed supplemental appropriation ordinance (File 04- 
0094) be amended to reduce the total amount by 
$1,006,534, from $16,719,301 to $15,712,767. The Budget 
Analyst recommends (a) approval of four new positions 
(1.0 FTE in FY 2003-2004) of the requested 15 new 
positions, (b) disapproval of 10 new positions (2.5 FTEs in 
FY 2003-2004), and (c) considers the approval of one new 
0932 Manager IV, Contract Compliance Manager for 
Infrastructure position (0.25 FTE in FY 2003-2004), to be 
a policy decision for the Board of Supervisors. 

1. In accordance with Comments 17, 18, 20 and 21, reduce 
the PEIR Project request by $115,469, from $4,677,000 to 
$4,561,531. 



2. In accordance with Comment No. 22, reduce Rental 
Costs by $102,952, from $231,244 to $128,292, to reflect 
the correct estimated May 1. 2004 lease commencement 
date (page 3, line 14). 
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
45 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



3. In accordance with Comment No. 22, reduce Furniture 
Costs by $107,451, from $426,162 to $318,711, to reflect a 
more reasonable estimate for furniture costs (page 3, line 
20). 

4. In accordance with Comment Nos. 24 and 25, delete 
permanent salary funding for the 0941 Manager VI 
Manager of Workforce Development position and reduce 
permanent salary funding for the 0942 Manager VII 
position to reflect the PUC's anticipated hire date for this 
position, by a total of $37,448 from $71,985 to $34,537 
(page 2, line 8). 

Reduce related mandatory Fringe Benefits by $5,901, 
from $9,597 to $3,696 (Page 2. Controller to make detailed 
adjustments). Reductions from these two amendments of 
salaries and fringes would therefore total $43,349. 

5. In accordance with Comment No. 28, 30, 31, 32, and 33 
reduce the DHR Work Order by $444,893, from $484,713 
to $39,820 (page 4, line 7). 

6. In accordance with Comment No. 35, adding additional 
resources, a 0932 Manager IV position, to the MBE and 
WBE program for the Water System CIP, is a policy 
decision for the Board of Supervisors. 

7. In accordance with Comment Nos. 34, 35, 36, and 37, 
reduce the requested amount for the HRC Work Order by 
$138,778 from $263,000 to $124,222 (page 4, line 9). 
Should the Board of Supervisors decide to approve this 
position, funding should be reduced by $11,449 from 
$34,348 to $22,899 to reflect a May 1 anticipated hire 
date, rather than the budgeted April 1 hire date. 

8. In accordance with Comment No. 39, reduce the Airport 
Work Order by $53,642 from $125,186 to $71,544 (page 4, 
line 13). 

9. In accordance with Comment Nos. 15, 39 and 41, 
amend the proposed ordinance to provide for retroactivity. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

46 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



The Budget Analyst recommends the following 
amendments to the proposed additions to the FY 2003- 
2004 Annual Salary Ordinance (File No. 04-0095): 

10. In accordance with Comment No. 17, delete one 5293 
Planner IV position (page 2, line 5). 

11. In accordance with Comment No. 21, delete two 5298 
Planner III positions (page 2, line 6). 

12. In accordance with Comment No. 24, delete one 0941 
Manager VI Manager of Workforce Development position 
(page 1, line 18). 

13. In accordance with Comment No. 33, delete one 1201 
Personnel Technician Trainee, one 1241 Personnel 
Analyst, and two 1244 Senior Personnel Analysts 
positions (page 3, lines 3, 13, 15, and 17 respectively). 

14. In accordance with Comment No. 36, delete one 2978 
Contract Compliance Officer II position, and one 2996 
Human Rights Commission Representative position (page 
2, lines 15, 16, and 18 respectively). 

15. The Budget Analyst recommends: (a) approval of the 
Intertie Project, (b) approval, as amended, of the PEIR 
project, and (c) approval, as amended, of the additional 
office space, staff, and services of other departments. In 
accordance with Comment No. 35, the Budget Analyst 
considers approval of one new 0932 Manager rV Contract 
Compliance Manager to be a policy matter for the Board 
of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

47 




Water 

Hetch Hetchy 
Water ft Power 

_-. .-. . .-. r.\ 



Gavin Newsom 

Mayor 

E. Dennis Normandy 

President 

Robert J. Costello 

Vice President 

Commissioners: 
Ann Moller Caen 
Adam Werbach 
Ryan L. Brooks 

Patricia E. Martel 

General Manager 

Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. 

assistant General 

Manager 

Infrastructure 



Attachment! 
Page 1 of 9 



Office of the Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure 
1 1 55 Market Street, 1 1th Floor, San Francisco, California 941 03 
Tel. (4 1 5) 554-0740 • Fax (4 1 5) 554-2466 • Email HKelly@Sfwater.org 



fl 



MEMORANDUM 



TO: 



FROM: 



Elaine Forbes 
Budget Analyst 



Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. 



DATE: 



March 8, 2004 



SUBJECT: Attachment I: 
Background / 
Justification 
for Supplemental 



Le gislative Authority 



In July 2002, the Board of Supervisors approved the presentation of a Charter 
Amendment, Proposition E, on the November 2002 ballot that would permit the San 
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to issue revenue bonds without 
prior voter approval. The successful passage of this measure authorized any 
addition to the SFPUC 's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) subject to 
Commission approval and subsequent water rate adjustments. 

The SFPUC CIP was updated on August 21, 2003 to include the Intertie between 
the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and the SFPUC. Once the 
project is completed, the SFPUC portion will be placed into the water base, with 
costs recovered according to the formula contained in the Master Water Sales 
Agreement between San Francisco and its wholesale customers. 

Besides local mandate to move forward with water system improvements, the 
California State Legislature created a financing vehicle and an oversight mechanism 
to ensure the success of the SFPUC CIP. The San Francisco Bay Area Regional 
Water System Financing Authority Act (SB 1870) created a Regional Financing 
Authority (RFA) that may issue revenue bonds to fund capital improvement 
projects for the regional water system. 

Concwrently, the Wholesale Regional Water System Security and Reliability Act 
(AB1823) imposes various reporting requirements on the SFPUC. Annual progress 
reports and updates of the SFPUC CIP must be submitted to the State Department 
of Health Services, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee and the Seismic Safety 
Commission. AB1823 established a timeline for completion of specified regional 
water system projects. 
Reorganization of the SFPUC CIP Management System 



4 



48 



Attac hment I 
Office of the Budget Analyst PTge 2 of 9 

Page 2 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



The reorganization of the Infrastructure Division that manages the SFPUC CIP is 
intended to make roles and responsibilities explicit, enhance organizational 
capacity, and foster cross-disciplinary interactions to increase and ensure staff 
productivity. Due to the time parameters and exacting conditions of the new 
schedule, staff must be supplemented by the advocacy and regulatory expertise of a 

0941 Workforce Development Director; the strategic and managerial expertise of a 

0942 Bureau Manager for Program Development; the specialized programmatic 
environmental impact reporting expertise of a 0941 Manager; and the technical 
expertise and support of a dedicated manager, individual or team from the 
Departments of City Planning, Human Resources and Human Rights to provide 
services, respectively, to expedite planning, personnel, and contract compliance 
requirements. 

CIP Schedule and Budgets 

On May 28, 2002, the SFPUC CIP was approved by the SFPUC Board of 
Commissioners. The May 2002 CIP baseline included a spend forecast of $20 million 
in Year 1 (2003-2004) and $48.5 million in Year 2 (2004-05). When the budget 
request for Year 1 was made, it was recognized that the complex environmental process 
associated with the regional projects would require a programmatic approach to the 
planning of the CEP. This would ultimately result in schedule delay of the overall 
program. Therefore, a very aggressive and ambitious plan was produced to accelerate 
the front end of the program, in order to mitigate possible future schedule delays as 
well as to maintain a sensible programmatic approach. 

Environmental Review Phase 

The SFPUC is aware of the need to fully consider the environmental impact of 
projects and provide mitigation where necessary, even when significant delays 
could potentially occur during the permitting phase of CEP implementation. 

In mid-2003, after consultation with the City Attorney's Office and the Planning 
Department, SFPUC determined it needed to prepare a Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Report (PEER) for the 37 Regional Projects of the Water 
System CEP. The inclusion of the PEER is not only necessary but will provide an 
overview of future projects, address system-wide objectives, and streamline future 
CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] review of projects. This 
programmatic approach to the planning of the Regional Projects would have caused 
delays to the Water System CIP because the PEER, which will take approximately 
30 months to complete, must be completed before the 37 Regional Projects 
commence. 

PEER analysis of the environmental effects of the regional CIP projects, the 
ascertainment of ways to reduce or avoid possible environmental degradation, and 
identification of alternatives that would reduce or avoid the significant adverse 



49 



Attac hment I 
Office of the Budget Analyst Page 3 of 9 

Page 3 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



effects of the proposed projects, will necessarily result in a new CIP schedule. Any 
slippage of this new schedule will result in an average escalation cost per month of 
$400,000 if 80% of regional projects are delayed by one year. 

On August 21, 2003, the first annual CIP program status report and update as of June 
30, 2003 was submitted as required by the Wholesale Regional Water System Security 
and Reliability Act (AB1923), San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System 
Financing Authority (SB 1870), and Proposition E. The SFPUC amended the original 
Water System CIP to include the Intertie project between EBMUD and the SFPUC. A 
new spend profile was created with the June 2003 baseline requiring spending of $66 
million in Year 1 and a cumulative spend of $153 million after Year 2. 

In order to prevent serious delays to the Water System CIP, the SFPUC reconfigured 
the Water System CIP project schedule to: (1) ensure that the PEIR is completed as 
early as possible; (2) include the Intertie Project to the Water System CIP, which is a 
Regional Project but does not require the completion of the PEIR to begin; and (3) 
advance in the schedule local projects, which also do not require the completion of the 
PEIR. 

The current status of all 77 CIP projects is as follows: (a) the start dates of 28 regional 
projects have been moved earlier generally due to a need for a programmatic approach 
to planning and environmental review, (b) the start dates of 8 regional and local 
projects have essentially remain unchanged, (c) the start date of the San Antonio Pump 
Station regional project has been moved two years later in order to integrate this project 
within the Sunol Valley plan, (d) the start dates of 27 local projects have been moved 
earlier and five local projects moved later due to a reassessment of priorities. 

In addition, the table that follows identifies the implementation status of nine projects 
identified as significant by AB1823. CIP implementation is underway for eight of the 
nine projects. As the table indicates, four projects, which are undergoing the early 
stages of project environmental review, would be delayed pending the completion of 
the overall PEIR. 



50 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 4 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



Attachment I 
Page 4 of 9 



Projects Identified in Wholesale Regional Water System Security and Reliability Act 



# 


Description 


Start 
Date 


Status 


9970 


Irvington Tunnel 
Alternative 


12/19/01 


Request for Proposal (RFP) for 
EIR advertised in December 
2003. 


201671 


Crystal Springs 
Pump Station & 
Pipeline 


12/3/01 


Planning in progress. 


99 


BDPL 1&2 Repair 
of Caissons/Pipe 
Bridge 


1/6/03 


Planning in progress. 


128 


BDPL Pipeline 
Upgrades at 
Hayward Fault 


1/6/03 


Planning in progress. 


9897 


Calaveras Fault 
Crossing Upgrade 




This project has been moved 
into the Irvington Tunnel 
Alternatives. 


9891 


Crystal Springs 
Bypass Pipeline 


7/1/02 


Environmental Review notice 
distributed. 


202339 


BDPL Cross 

Connections 3 & 4 


7/1/04 


Work not yet started. 


201441 


BDPL Hydraulic 
Capacity Upgrade 


12/19/01 


Panning duration extended to 
reflect time needed to procure 
consultant for the EIR. 


202135 


Calaveras Dam 

Seismic 

Improvements 


4/1/03 


Request Commission authority 
to issue EIR request for RFP. 



SFPUC/EBMUD Intertie 

This project will provide facilities for an Intertie between the East Bay Municipal Utility 
District (EBMUD) and San Francisco's water supply systems. The Intertie will provide 
up to 45 million gallons per day (MGD) in either direction. This project will do the 
following: 1) provide water to SFPUC and EBMUD in the event of major facility 
failures due to earthquakes and other disasters and during planned pipeline shutdowns of 
certain segments of the system for inspections and repairs and 2) make use of existing or 
planned Hayward Water System facilities to convey water in either direction. The 
SFPUC CIP was updated on August 21, 2003 to include the intertie with EBMUD. 

This Intertie project consists of construction of new Skywest Pump Station, new 8,000 
linear feet of 36-inch diameter pipeline, modifications to and use of existing City of 
Hayward's 42-inch and 33-inch pipelines, modifications to City of Hayward's Hesperian 
Pump Station and improvements at SFPUC's facilities at Newark Turnout. 



51 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 5 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



n u u a u ii in c n l 

Page 5 of 9 



SFPUC, EBMUD and the City of Hayward (COH) entered into a Memorandum of 
Understanding (MOU) on April 21, 2003, to pursue design services and construction of 
the Intertie and for long-term operation and maintenance of the Intertie. Since the main 
facilities are to be located in the City of Hayward, and operation of the Intertie would 
affect the City of Hayward' s water system, parties agreed that the City of Hayward would 
be the lead agency for the project. COH will be providing the use of existing pipe as well 
as right-of-way for the construction of the new pipeline section and pump station. 

The cost of the design and construction of the intertie facility is to be shared equally by 
SFPUC and EBMUD. In addition, both parties have agreed to pay for their own 
expenses related to staff time. 



Phase 


Start 


Complete 


Cost or 
Estimate 


SFPUC's 
Share 


Feasibility Report 


July 2002 


Oct 2002 


$30,000 


$9,000 


Initial Study 


Nov 2002 


April 2003 


25,000 


12,500 


Design 


Apr 2003 


Apr 2004 


1,265,000 


632,000 


Construction 


June 2004 


March 2006 


15,580,000 


7,790,000 


Construction Mgmt (SFPUC) 








610,000 


Total Budget 






$16,900,000 


$9,053,500 


SFPUC Prior Appropriation * 








(653,500) 


Supplemental Request 








$8,400,000 



* FAMIS Project PUW502, 5W AAA AAP I 

The feasibility study was performed by Carollo Engineers, who were under contract to the 
COH for designing the Hesperian Pump Station and for performing the hydraulic modeling 
of COH's distribution system. Both the Hesperian Pump Station and performance of the 
COH distribution system are critical for the Intertie Project. 

The initial study (environmental) was performed by Environmental Science Associates 
(ESA), who was also under contract with COH for preparing COH's EIR Master Plan for 
the Hayward City Airport. Parties agreed to use ESA because of their work on the 
Airport Property, upon which the pump station of the Intertie will be located. 

The construction contract will be put out to bid and awarded to the lowest responsive 
bidder. COH will administer the construction contract. The contract is expected to be put 
out to bid in the beginning of March 2004 with construction starting June 2004, and 
completing March 2006. The total construction costs are estimated at $15,580,000 of 
which SFPUC's share is $7,790,000. 

The construction management budget for SFPUC is listed below. 



52 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 6 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



Attachment 1 
Page 6 of 9 



EBMUD Intertie (Construction Management) 




Position 


Hours 


Rate 


Amount 


521 1 Senior Engineer 


900 


$ 162 


145,800 


5207 Associate Engineer 


1,800 


$ 120 


216,000 


63 1 8 Construction Inspector 


2,040 


$ 108 


220,300 


2486 Chemist 


80 


S 88 


7,000 


7317 Senior Water Service Inspector 


50 


$ 125 


6,300 


7284 Utility Plumber Supervisor 


60 


$ 130 


7,800 


7388 Utility Plumber 


60 


$ 108 


6,500 


Total Construction Management (Rounded) 


610,000 



Programmatic Environmental Impact Review (PEIR) 

The funding for the PEIR is being requested as a reappropriation of Proposition A Bond 
Funds from the following projects: 

• Standby Power Facilities: Various Locations: The project is now in planning 
phase. $199,000 has been requested in the FY 04-05 annual budget request, for a 
total project budget in FY04-05 of $844,000 for planning. 

• New Treated Water Reservoir (Sunol Valley): The project is currently in the 
planning phase, with environmental review initiated. Design is anticipated to 
begin this calendar, with 50% design completion targeted for end of calendar year 
2004. Along with $1.8 million currently in the project, another $3 million is 
being requested in the FY04-05 annual budget request to continue with design. 

• Sunol Treatment Capacity (enlarge): The project planning has been delayed, but 
planning efforts will begin in the third quarter of this calendar year (originally 
planned to start Spring 04). No additional funds have been requested for FY04- 
05. There is currently $423,000 in the project. 

• Recycled Water: A Recycled Water Master Plan has been developed, and the 
"program" has projects to implement use of recycled water. Including the current 
$1.6 million in the "program," another $4.5 million has been requested in the 
FY04-05 budget to continue planning, design and construction of the projects in 
the program. 

The proposed budget is as follows: 



53 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 7 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



Attachment I 
Page 7 of 9 



Planning 


Position 


Hours 


Rate 


Amount 


5634 Resources Manager 


848 


$150 


SI 27.200 


5291 Planner EI 


153 


115 


17,595 


5508 Project Mgr IV 


360 


200 


72,000 


5212 Principal Engineer 


830 


180 


149,400 


0941 Manager VI 


360 


180 


64.800 


Subtotal Citv-Staff 






$430,995 


Senior Program Manager 


600 


$164 


$98,400 


Environmental Engineer 


1 ,900 


103 


195,700 


Environmental Engineer 


3.160 


90 


284,400 


Civil Engineer 


700 


95 


66,500 


Administrative Assistant 


205 


49 


10,045 


Subtotal Consultants 






$655,045 


Total Planning (Rounded) 




$1,086,000 


Environmental Review 


Position 


Hours 


Rate 


Amount 


5634 Resources Manager 


80 


$150 


$12,000 


5293 Planner IV 


230 


135 


31,000 


5299 Planner IV (Env Rvw) 


200 


135 


27,000 


5298 Planner HI (Env Rvw) 


180 


115 


21,000 


Subtotal City-Staff 






$91,000 


Subtotal Consultants 






2,500,000 


Total Environmental Review 




2,591,000 


Scheduling and Program Controls 


Position 


Hours 


Rate 


Amount 


5506 Project Manager III 


72C 


$18C 


$129,600 


5212 Principal Engineer 


84C 


18C 


151,200 


5241 Engineer 


2,46C 


14C 


344,400 


5207 Associate Engineer 


1,98C 


12C 


237,600 


5203 Assistant Engineer 


1,332 


103 


137,196 


Total City Staff (Rounded) 




$1,000,000 


TOTAL FUNDING REQUEST 




$4,677,000 



54 



Attachment I 
Office of the Budget Analyst Page 8 of 9 

Page 8 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



On September 23, 2003, the SFPUC Commission approved the advertisement and 
selection process to retain a consultant to provide environmental analyses services for the 
Regional Water System Improvements. The consultant is expected to perform 
environmental studies, prepare the draft and final PEIR document and other 
environmental documents, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act 
(CEQA), CEQA guidelines, San Francisco Administrative Code Chapter 31, and related 
local, State, and Federal Regulatory requirements. The SFPUC has moved forward on 
the selection process and conducted interviews. This request will be used to fund the 
consultant contract. 

■ Selection Process 

A Request for Proposal (RFP) was advertised on October 9, 2003. The RFP was 
advertised on the City website for all contracts. The pre-proposal conference was 
held October 15, 2003. Interviews of the two proposers were held on December 
3, 2003. The selection was based on review of written proposals, and oral 
presentations and responses to questions prepared by SFPUC staff. The selection 
panelists included one representative each from BAWSCA and the Santa Clara 
Valley Water District and three representatives from within the City. Weight (in 
scoring) was not given to the cost proposal. The selection panel did not see cost 
proposals (in sealed envelopes until after selection of consultant). The consultant 
selected for negotiations of a contract with the SFPUC is ES A+Orion 
Environmental Associates, Joint Venture. 

While the hours for the ESA + Orion, TV have not been estimated by task, the 
consultant contract is expected to be for a duration of 30 months and is expected 
not to exceed $2.5 million. Certification of the contract and notice-to- proceed is 
anticipated to be in March 2004, after approval of tins supplemental 
appropriation. 

SFPUC staff time under this request is to prepare the Request for Proposal for 
Program EIR; work on consultant selection and negotiations; develop program 
alternatives, or project bundles, for the PEIR; develop the strategy document for 
the program (and projects in the Regional Water System); update and monitor 
both the overall program schedule as well as the regional project schedules; and 
communicating with BAWSCA and other agencies regarding progress on the 
tasks. 



55 



Pane g ^~f g~ 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 9 of 9 
March 8, 2004 



There are five new positions included in this request: (1) 0941 Manager VI; (1) 5293 
Planner IV; (1) 5299 Planner IV-Environmental Review, and (2) 5298 Planner Ill- 
Environmental Review. The expected hire date for these positions is April 2004. 

■ SFPUC 

The 0941 Manager VI is a new position that the SFPUC has requested, and that 
DHR has recently approved. SFPUC is in the process of preparing an amendment 
to the ASO to include this position. This position will work on developing 
program strategy, and should be very knowledgeable on the operations of the 
SFPUC water system. The 5293 Planner IV position in SFPUC will provide 
supervisory and project management of numerous CEQA project and task 
associated with the 77 local and regional CIP projects, many of which will begin 
in the current year and many of which will be running simultaneously over a 
period of years. 

■ City Planning 

In preliminary conversations with the City Planning Department, SFPUC 
understood that the City Planning Department had vacant positions that could be 
used to support the SFPUC environmental review requirements. Subsequent 
conversations revealed that City Planning did not have surplus vacant positions to 
dedicate for the CIP. Thus, the SFPUC is creating three positions through this * 
appropriation request and will loan the positions to the City Planning 
Department. 

The three positions (5299 Planner IV and 5298 Planner III) for the City's 
Planning Department Office of Major Environmental Review will ensure that the 
documents produced in the environmental review process are compliant with 
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition to environmental 
impact reports that will be required of the larger and more complex regional water 
projects, we will need to prepare mitigated negative declarations and categorical 
exemptions. 

The City Board of Supervisors must certify all CEQA documents that the SFPUC 
will be producing in order to construct its system improvements. The City 
Planning Department, therefore, will need to advise SFPUC in their development, 
and approve the final documents. Consequently, SFPUC has agreed to create and 
fund three of these positions within their budget and provide the necessary 
workspaces, in order to work on SFPUC projects over the next nine years. 



Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or need additional 
information. Thank you. 



4 



56 



> 



HUMRN p^t-t-ot-t 

RGSOWRC65 

city si countv of i| srn farnosco 
Andrea R. Gourdine, Human Resources Director 



January 21, 2004 



Harlan Kelly Jr. 

Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure 

Public Utilities Commission 

1 155 Market Street, 1 1 th floor 

San Francisco, CA 94103 



Dear Mr. Kelly Jr.: 



This is in response to a request from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Capital Improvement 
Program (CIP) to review documentation and an organization chart that outlines the duties and 
responsibilities of one 5293 Planner IV position that will be assigned to the Environmental 
Review/Permitting Unit of the Planning Bureau of PUC, and a 5299 Planner IV Environmental Review 
and two 5298 Planner III Environmental Review positions assigned to the Planning Department. 

According to the documentation provided, the 5293 Planner IV will plan, administer, and direct the 
activities of a project group engaged in the environmental review and permitting process for the 
implementation of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's regional projects that are a part of 
the Capital Improvement Program. The Planner IV will also advise senior management on pertinent 
federal, state and local regulations affecting the implementation of the SFPUC regional projects in the 
CIP; make recommendations on the appropriate department actions; develop and prepare difficult and 
complex technical reports; represent the department in public meetings; act as technical advisor on all 
studies and problems related to environmental review and permitting of the regional projects in the CIP; 
serve as liaison with regulatory agencies such as the Department of City Planning, San Francisco Bay 
Area Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development 
Commission.- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Department of Fish and Game; 
and perform other duties as required. 

The 5299 Planner IV Environmental Review position will supervise office staff engaged in the 
preparation and review of Environmental Impact Reports and environmental evaluations on both the 
SFPUC Capital Improvement Program, and the specific projects that make up the Capital Improvement 
Program, to insure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the San Francisco 
Administrative Code and other governmental regulations and guidelines. In addition, the position will 
oversee major studies for the SFPUC Capital Improvement Program and projects; implement and 
enforce city planning policies and procedures; gather, analyze and interpret planning data and prepare 
recommendations; prepare difficult and complex technical reports; represent the department at public 
meetings: act as a technical advisor on all studies and problems related to planning: and perform related 
duties as required. 



57 

44 Souoh Street. Son fronciscc. CR 94103-1233 



Atta chment I t 
Hage 2 of 2 



Letter to Harlan Kelly Jr. 
Page 2 of 2 
January 21, 2004 



The two 5298 Planner Ills will work on the SFPUC Capital Improvement Program for the rehabilitation 
of the water system. They will manage and coordinate all necessary activities required for the 
production and completion of Environmental Impact Reports, Negative Declarations and Categorical 
Exemptions for specific projects within the CIP and these positions will report to the 5299 Planner IV 
Environmental Review position. 

Staff has reviewed these requests and compared it to classes within the Environmental Specialist series 
(classes 5642, 5644, and 5646). However, the Environmental Specialist classes focus on the specialties 
of Clean Air Programs, Energy Conservation Programs, Public Outreach and Education Programs, 
Recycling Commercial and Residential Programs, and Toxics Reduction Programs. We understand that 
the requested positions will be working on the Capital Improvement Program for the rehabilitation of the 
water system and therefore, the Environmental Specialist classes would not be appropriate. 

Our preliminary review indicates that the department can use the requested Planner classes for the 
described positions. If the department wants to request that any of these positions be posted in the future, 
a completed Job Analysis Questionnaire will need to be submitted for each position so that these 
positions can be posted for classification action. If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at 
557-4934. 



Sincerely, 



fa 

Elaine Lee 

Principal Personnel Analyst 



Cc: Marsha Stroope, Department of Human Resources 
Pat Martel, Public Utilities Commission 
Therese Madden, Public Utilities Commission 
Pat Pendergast, Public Utilities Commission 
Rosie Rios. Public Utilities Commission 



58 



Attachment I H 
Page 3 of 3 



Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program to provide work opportunities for 
disadvantaged businesses both locally and regionally in the areas where capital projects 
and infrastructure is to be performed and the production and implementation of a major 
outreach and incentive plan that will result in the expansion of the contractor pool. The 
management complexity of this position is based upon the magnitude of projects served 
($5.1 billion over 13 years), the expansion of the service area including the introduction 
of initiatives such as the First Source Program and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise 
Program to eight counties other than San Francisco and the need to ensure consistency 
and integration in contract compliance policy and procedure among four separate 
departments (PUC, DP W, RPD and HRC). Sufficient information has been received to 
preliminarily recommend class 0932 Manager IV for the position as described. 

If you have any questions or if I can be of further assistance, please contact me on 
415-557-4806. 

Sincerely, 




Robert W. Pritchard 
Principal Personnel Analyst 

cc: Patricia Martel, PUC 
Therese Madden, PUC 
Pat Pendergast, PUC 
Rosie Rios, PUC 
Carol Isen, PUC 
Marsha Stroope, DHR 
Elaine Lee, DHR 



59 



Attachment III 
D€PfWM€NT OF p , f , 

HUAARN 9 [ of 3 



RGSOWRCeS 

OTV & COUMTV OP ■■ SBN FBFlNCiSCO 

findrec R. Gourdins. Human Resources Director 

January 22, 2004 



Mr. Harlan Kelly 
Assistant General Manager, PUC 
1 155 Market Street, 8 th Floor 
San Francisco, C A 94103 

Dear Mr. Kelly: 

This is in response to a request from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Capital 
Improvement Program (CIP) to review the Job Analysis Questionnaires (JAQs) for four 
new positions, three to be assigned to the CIP and one to be assigned to the Human 
Rights Commission (HRC). 

Requests to Classify were received for the following positions: 

1) 0942 Manager VII: Manager of Program Development and Support Bureau • 

2) 0941 Manager VI, Director of Workforce Development-Capital Improvement Program 

3) 0941 Manager VI, Manager of Program Development Coordination 

4) 0932 Manager IV. Contract Compliance Manager for Infrastructure. 

Staff has reviewed the JAQs, organizational charts and other information provided on 
these positions and preliminarily recommends the following: 

1) 0942 Manager VII: Manager of Program Development and Support Bureau . 

Staff has reviewed the JAQ, organization chart and other information received on this 
position. This position functions at an executive level and is responsible for providing 
the strategic vision, comprehensive planning efforts and technical support for the 
Infrastructure Division, oversees all program efforts, including development of program 
strategy and coordination for approval/adoption of the Program Environmental Impact 
Report (EIR) and other project specific EIRs. The position establishes policies for the 
program, provides project initiation and development and serves as chief liaison for the 
SFPUC Planning and Operations divisions and associated regulatory/advisory bodies. 
The Program Development &. Support Bureau contains all technical activities supporting 
the Bureaus of Project Management, Engineering Design and Construction Management 
including: cost estimating, scheduling, controls, risk analysis, performance audits, 
procedures and policies, quality assurance and quality controls, peer review, and value 
engineering. Centralized technical functions allow the Infrastructure Division to 
prioritize, schedule, track and manage projects cohesively and collaboratively among the 
bureaus, the SFPUC, the City and the external agencies involved with the Infrasirucrure 
Division's projects and programs. Sufficient information has been received to 
preliminarily recommend class 0942 Manager VII for the position as described. 



60 



Attachment I I I 
Page 2 of 3 



2) 0941 Manager VI: Director of Workforce Development, Capital Improvement 
Program . Staff conducted an analysis of the position based upon the draft class 
specification and the draft organizational chart provided. Under policy direction, this 
position functions at the executive level of management at the PUC and is responsible for 
planning, organizing, directing assisting in all aspects of internal and external workforce 
development; developing staffing plans, joint committees, and training programs; and 
providing leadership in workplace organization efforts and personnel activities. The 
position is differentiated from class 1270 Departmental Personnel Officer and class 1272 
Senior Departmental Personnel Officer in that these classes are responsible for 
administering the human resources program for employees of a diversified departmental 
organization. This position will also function independently from the Assistant General 
Manager of Labor Relations, PUC and is differentiated from that position in that the 
Director of Workforce Development will work exclusively on labor relations issues 
related to CIP work. The analysis revealed that the requested position meets the criteria 
for class 0941 Manager VI in 7 of the 11 allocation factors. Of the four allocation factors 
that the proposed position failed to meet, two were not met due to insufficient 
information. Sufficient information has been received to preliminarily recommend class 
0941 Manager VI for the position as described. 

3) 0941 Manager VI: Manager of Program Development. Coordination . Staff 
conducted an analysis of the position based upon the JAQ and the organizational chart 
provided. This position is a senior staff member within the Program Development & 
Support Bureau responsible for managing and coordinating the operations of the San 
Francisco Regional Water System. Oversees all operation efforts, including day-to-day 
operations of the Regional Transmission System which includes the operation of all 
regional water treatment facilities. Oversight of shutdown, startup and overall facilities 
operations. Coordinates all Capital Program construction activities of the Regional Water 
System. Works closely with senior staff to establish policies for the bureau and serves as 
a liaison for SFPUC Planning and Operations divisions and associated regulatory and 
advisory bodies. Centralized operations functions will allow the Infrastructure Division 
to prioritize, track and manage current and future maintenance and operations of capital 
projects cohesively and collaboratively among the bureaus, the SFPUC, the City and 
external agencies. While the allocation factors definitely justify at least an 0933 
recommendation, the reporting relationships lead to a recommendation that this position 
be allocated to the 0941 Manager VI level. 

4) _0932 Manager IV: Contract Compliance Manager for Infrastructure. Staff 

conducted an analysis of the position based upon the JAQ, organization chart and other 
information received. Tins position will be located in the Human Rights Commission 
and will report to the Director of the Human Rights Commission. The position will audit 
evaluate, plan and implement the staffing an activities of the contract compliance group, 
serving three major departments, the Public Utilities Commission, the Department of 
Public Works and the Recreation and Parks Department. This position will consult, 
advise and assist department and agency executives. City Attorney, and regulatory 
agencies such as the Bay Area Water User's Alliance. In addition, this position will 
perform special projects, including the full development and implementation of a 



61 




MEMORANDUM 



Attachment IV 
Page 1 of 2 



WATER 
HETCH HETCHT 

Water a power 

CLEiH WiTSR 



GAVIN L. NEWSOM 

MAYOR 

E. DENNIS NORMANDY 
PRESIDENT 

ROBERT J. COSTELLO 
vce PRESIDENT 

ANN MOLLEA CAEN 
ADAM WERBACH 
RYAN L. BROOKS 

PATRICIA E. MARTEL 

GENERAL UANACEP 



February 9, 2004 
To: Elaine Forbes 
Budget Analyst 

From: Michael Carl in 

Manager, SFPUC Planning Bureau 

Subject: Funding Request in Support of PEIR Environmental Review 



The purpose of this memorandum provides supplemental information regarding the 
process for consultant selection for the Programmatic Environmental Impact Report 
(PEIR) and request for additional positions. The requests for additional positions are 
three (3) positions for the City's Planning Department Office of Major 
Environmental Review (MEA) and one (1) position for the SFPUC. 

You requested information on the amount and details of selection of the PEIR 
Consultant contract. The consultant selection process was through a Request for 
Proposals that was released for distribution on November 9, 2003. The contract is to 
provide services to meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 
requirements for the CIP Program Improvements. The amount of the contract is not 
to exceed S2.5 million over 30 months from the date of the Notice to Proceed. We 
received two proposals that were found to be responsive and scored by an interview 
panel. 1 have attached the relevant Human Rights Commission and SFPUC 
Commission Agenda items that provide greater detail on final scores and the selected 
consultant. 

In preliminary conversations with the City Planning Department, SFPUC understood 
that the City Planning Department had vacant positions that could be used to support 
of the SFPUC environmental review requirements. Subsequent conversations 
revealed that City Planning did not have surplus vacant positions. Thus, the SFPUC 
is creating three positions in their budget and will detail the positions to the City 
Planning Department. The request for the additional positions is to insure that the 
documents produced in the environmental review process are compliant with CEQA. 
In addition to individual Environmental Impact Reports that will be required of the 
larger and more complex regional water projects, there will be the need to prepare 
mitigated negative declarations and categorical exemptions. 

The City Board of Supervisors must certify all CEQA documents that SFPUC will be 
producing in order to construct its system improvements. The City Planning 
Department, therefore, will need to advise SFPUC in their development, and approve 
the final documents. Consequently. SFPUC has agreed to create and fund three of 

62 

PLANNING BUREAU 
1145 Market Street - Suite 401 - San Francisco, CA 94103 - (415) 934-5700 - FAX (415) 934-5750 



MQP-09-2004 12=01 



4 155544066 



9&X 



t\ t, L Q <- IIIIICI 




Water 
Hetch HETCHr 

water a power 

Clean Water 



Page 



2 of 2 



MEMORANDUM 



these positions within our budget and provide the necessary work spaces, in order to 
work on SFPUC projects over the next nine years. The second Planner IV position is 
also required to provide supervisory and project management skills for the numerous 
CEQA projects and tasks associated with the seventy-seven local and regional CIP 
projects, many of which will begin in the next year and many of which will be 
running simultaneously over a period of years. 

Please contact me at (415) 934-5787 if you have questions. 

Cc: Kaihy How 
Carol Isen 

Attachments SFPUC Agenda Item for PEIR Contractor Award/HRC Memo 



63 

PLANNING BUREAU 
1145 Market Street- Suite 401 -Sf- Francisco. CA 94103 - (415) 934-5700- FAX (415)934-5750 



Attachment V 
Page 1 of 2 
MEMORANDUM 

Date: March 10, 2004 

To: Elaine Forbes, Budget Analyst 

From: Jamie Austin, Human Resources 

Cc: Carol Isen, PUC 

Subject: PUC CEP Supplemental Appropriation - DHR Workorder and Positions 

The following is additional information on DFfR's $515,793 workorder included in the 
PUC CIP appropriation and the ASO amendment to add 0.25 FTE (one full-time position 
starting in April 2004) positions to DHR. 

Purpose of Workorder 

DHR is and will be providing the PUC CIP program continuous testing services, 
classification studies, training, recruitment, employee relations, and certifications and 
appointments. 

Amount of Workorder 

The DHR workorder for the PUC CEP in FY 2003-04 is $515,793, of which the PUC is 
requesting $185,793 in the proposed supplemental appropriation. This $185,793 is 
composed of two elements. 

The first element is a budget of $194,650 to cover various non-labor costs, including 
$140,000 in professional services contracts that have not yet been issued. Of the 
$140,000, $100,000 will be used to conduct a workforce utilization study using expert 
contractors, per the City's agreement with Local 21 . The balance of $140,000, or 
$40,000, will be used to pay outside consultants to recruit highly technical classifications. 
Of the balance of the $194,650, or $54,650, will be used for the following purposes: 
$8,000 for advertising for 13 job classifications 
$4,250 for rater travel/lodging/per diem 
$3,000 for rater food and supplies 

$6,500 for exam proctors for 350 exam proctor hours (@ $18.60) 
$7,000 for materials, supplies, telephone, postage and reproduction services 
$7,000 for telephone for providing classifications and recruitment and selection 

services for 13 job classes 
$5,600 for postage 

$2,800 for reproduction for anticipated applicant pool of approximately 1,500 
$10,500 for computers, printer, software license and technical support 

The second element is an offset of $8,857 between what has previously been established 
in workorders for DHR salary and mandatory fringe benefits and the amount DPJR 
projects to spend for these costs (see below). Thus, only $185,793 is included in the 



64 



Attachment V 
Page 2 of 2 

proposed supplemental appropriation. Additional positions, beyond the one full-time 
position starting in April 2004, will be included in DHR's budget proposal for FY 2004- 
05. 

Actual Costs to Date 

DHR has incurred $139,887 through January 31, 2004 against existing a PUC CJP 
workorder for $280,000, and a PUC workorder for $50,000, for a total of $330,000. We 
project to spend $321,143 in salary and mandatory fringe benefit costs though the end of 
the fiscal year. This includes costs for the one full-time position starting in April 2004. 
Thus, there is $8,857 available to cover part of the $194,650 in non-labor costs. As a 
result, the $194,650 for non-labor costs in workorder may be reduced to $185,793. 



65 



Attachment VI 



February 26, 2004 



MEMORANDUM 



To: Marsha Stroope 

Deputy Director, Merit System Services 

From: Elaine Lee 

Principal Personnel Analyst 

Re: Justification for a 1203 Personnel Technician 



Since July 1, 2003 we have not had the support of a class 1203 Personnel Technician and therefore all of 
the technical and clerical responsibilities related to our work with the Public Utilities Commission have 
been done by professional staff. 

Looking ahead, we will need the support of a Personnel Technician for the following reasons: 

1 . With the implementation of the GESP program for class 5201 , we have started to receive a large 
number of applications. We will be establishing eligible lists on a more frequent basis due to the 
number of applications. In addition, the implementation of the GESP program requires that we 
track applicants and personnel hired to ensure that they meet the requirements of the program 
and that will necessitate the assistance of support personnel. 

2. Currently, we have continuous testing for classes 5201, 5203, and 5207. As we move forward, 
we will also be implementing continuous testing for class 5241 Engineer. There is a great deal of 
data entry, applicant monitoring and other related clerical duties which would justify the support 
of a Personnel Technician. 

3. The consolidation of the Engineer, Architect and Landscape Architect classes along with the 
subsequent development of examinations for these new classes further support our need for a 
Personnel Technician. It is also very likely that we may move towards continuous testing for 
some or all of the new classes. 

4. We will need someone to handle all of the logistics related training hiring managers on selection 
processes. Furthermore, we will also need someone to perfonn clerical duties such as creating 
Powerpoint presentations, making copies of handouts, setting up the training rooms and other 
related tasks. 

5. We will also need a Personnel Technician to support the professional staff in the development 
and maintenance of PUC CIP examinations for MCCP classes. 

I hope that this provides you with sufficient justification of our need for a Personnel Technician. If you 
need any additional information, please let me know. 

66 





+* ' 


5oN(M(DOO' 
^ in MO ^ft 03 
J l <*f "c- lO CM co m 

"^ ro" m* ai ed (dV 
%. ro co -* m r-~ 


CO 

cm" 

o 

CO 


■SgoNCMCMO 


co oo 






1 


t/j i 

o < 
_ o 

re r- 

4-1 — - { 


n m w CM "* •**■ ""*" 
■S W, KC0 10^" CD* 03 

5x:^coco^-t-cd 


CO o 

T-" -* 

CM CM 
CM CO 






1 


^- o 


w- 


<~ 




«• «• 








E 






E 














I 

CO 


.n in in in in in m 




co 


13 in in in in in 








co 

x: 

c 




Ifl 


.n m in m m m m 




0) 


rj m in in in in 








o 




CO 


T— T— T— T— T— T— T— 




DQ 


"~ "T *"! *"" ""i "^ 








E 




LL 


C3 CD O O O O O 




u. 


dddooo 








X 




s 














'co 


— 




m in oo cm h- co co 




re 


in in co cm n oo 








D5 

C 






[v. CM -i CO in <<fr 00 
CO ^ go ^ ^ ^ cq 




s. CM rA oo uo 00 
n . **. CM ^ «* «? 








5 

o 

5 




re 
CO 


ro n o in ^ oo 
■<3- cm in in in 




re 
to 


ros o in oo 
•«t cm m in 










c 






c 










x: 




o 

















*L 


1/5 


".13 

re 


■*tf- O O t- CM CD O 




*3 

re 
o 

'55 


■^t O O t- CM o 








CD 
0) 


05 

"o 


u 
'in 


oj m m co co co s 
oo ^r ■<* 05 bS t- cm 
-r- t- t- o o in in 




CM ID Lfi CO co s 
CO "^ ^ 05 CD CM 

1- t- •!- O O UO 








5 

CO 


a. 

a. 
o 


U] 

re 
O 






10 

re 
O 










CO 

l_ 

o 

sz 


o 

a. 




CD CD CD CO 00 CD CD 

in in in _^ ^: u-; m 

,-, " T "cOCOr^ 


co 


— -^ 
Cfl o 

j: o 


o o o in in o 
CM CM cm in in CM 

O O O CM CM O 


o 
o> 
to 

"^■" 


o o 

O Q_ 




o 

T3 

C 


c 


to c 






° ^s 






^~ 




CO 


o 


§3 






CM CO 

o <=> 

r-" 3 

■*—■ - 

CO £ 

5« 






CO 




CO 

sz 


1 


^^ — 










ro 
ro 

CD 




c 
o 

E 

X 



>*- 

CI 

c 


1= w 

o S 

ci^ 






c o 

O CN 

■ ^* 

CD ^, 






"ro 
o 

CO 


C/j 

SI 


'co 
"co 

it- 


2 

5 
















r- 


cu 














"ro 
o 

_E 


O 

E 

X 


o 


CA 




C C C C 




e 
a, o 

5 J 


C C C C 






'c/5 


_S£ 


05 
0) 

> 
o 

a 
E 
in 

c 




c 
a, .2 
« a 

S"5 


ca co co co 

~ ~ "C CO C/5 C/5 C 

eg eg co g g -g co 

X I I J) Q J) 1 

o o o 'o^o 'c~r o 




CO CO CO CO 

~ ~ L (|) ffl L 

co co co -g ■g co 

XXI CD CD X 

o o o'o'o o 




i 

05 

co 


"co 
CD 


CD 

Ci3 

CO 
CO 


co g 


i ii £ fc E i c 




co g 


t-< — ■ +- Q. D. ■*-• 
coca 




E 




CO 


a 


_ro ro re co' co co JE 

C/5 C/5 C/5 'o 'o O .K 




a 


CO CO CO CO CO re 
W "W "c/5 "5 "o "« 




ID 


05 
05 

C/5 


■a 

3 




"CO 'c/5 'c/5 CD 05 CD 'c/5 






'c/5 "c/5 'c/5 CD CD 'c/5 




C 


ro 

L. 




C/5 C/5 C/5 Q. O- Q. C/5 






C/5 C/5 C/5 D_ D- CO 




CO 


>, 




< < < CO CO CO < 






< < < CO CO < 




CD 


CO 


05 


U5 














'c 

c 

05 

—3 


c 
-5 


ro 


'E 
E 




C/5 

~ CD 






CO 

5 E o 




"55 

o 


CO 
CD 


■a 
< 




us 

a 

a. 


2 "a 
5 E o 


CO 


c 




_w 


re 

o 


ro 

"53 


05 

"g" 


ID 

o 

—1 


re 

i_ 

05 
C 
05 

CD 


CO " 8-5 

E Z CD ^ = C L 

o ro cd 2: O o a 
ro E c E "cD ra a 

CT5 C c 3 o 2 c 

T"" 1 CO Qj O O ;= .E 

LU CJ -n _l -3 H - 


re 

•4-1 

o 

i H 

J 
I 

1 


Ifl 

k 


Q. 


co^ g £ 

O CD CD Z Q Q - 

D_ ■= — ' 05 _ ^ 

t f» © ® >,= 

ro E c T2 "S tt 

OJ c c 3 o c 

T3 CO o O .= 

LUOtJt- 


re 

«-■ 
o 


1 1 

S5 o 
O E 

3 
M 
(A 
< 


E 

CO 

O 

CO 

05 
■D 

LU 


CO 
CO 

c 

1- 


ID 

c 

CO 

cz 

03 

o 
o 

~3 



67 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 04-0037 



Department: 



Item: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Administrative Services, 
Division (RED) 



Real Estate 



Resolution authorizing a new lease of 30,790 square feet of 
office space in a building located at 1145 Market Street, 
San Francisco for the City and County of San Francisco 
Public Utilities Commission. 



Location of the 
Proposed Lease: 



Lessor: 



Lessee: 



The entire first, eighth, and tenth floors, and a portion of 
the fourth floor of the 12-story office building located at 
1145 Market Street. 

The Sangiacomo Family Trust, Angelo Sangiacomo and 
Yvonne Sangiacomo, Co-Trustees 

City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through 
the PUC 



Rentable 
Square Footage: 

Amount: 

Source of Funds: 



30,790 rentable square feet 

$2,385,471 

$221,734 from the PUC's FY 2003-2004 budget and 
$2,163,737 from the $16,719,301 pending supplemental 
appropriation request under (File No. 04-0094) of the 
Budget Analyst's March 24, 2004 report to the Finance and 
Audits Committee. 



Rent Payable 
by the PUC 
to the Sangiacomo 
Family Trust: 



$64,145.83 monthly (approximately $2.08 per square foot 
per month), or $769,750 annually ($25.00 per square foot). 
The rent would remain the same during the entire term of 
the four-year lease, and there would neither be any 
Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments nor any operating 
expense pass-throughs. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

68 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Term of the 
Proposed Lease: 



Four years, commencing upon the substantial completion of 
the leasehold improvements by the lessor. According to Mr. 
Jerry Romani of the Real Estate Division (RED), the 
estimated commencement date of the subject lease is May 
1. 2004. 



Option to Renew: 



Two five-year options (see Comment No. 9) 



Utilities and Janitor 

Services: To be provided by lessor. 



Leasehold 
Improvements: 



Description: 



The proposed lease requires that the lessor complete the 
leasehold improvements prior to commencement of the 
lease at a total maximum cost of $1,094,008, of which 
$369,480 would be paid for by the lessor and a maximum of 
up to $724,528 would be funded by the PUC (see Comment 
Nos. 4 and 5). Attachment I, provided by Mr. Romani, 
contains a budget, source of funds, and scope of work for the 
leasehold improvements under the proposed lease. 
According to Mr. Romani, construction work is expected to 
begin in March of 2004 and be completed by May 1, 2004, 
at which time the subject lease would commence. 

The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is currently leasing 
approximately 140,000 rentable square feet of space for 
administrative offices in the building located at 1155 
Market Street, which is adjacent to the subject proposed 
facility at 1145 Market Street. Of the 140,000 rentable 
square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, approximately 
48,318 rentable square feet of space, on the third, sixth, 
seventh, and ninth floors, is currently used to accommodate 
274 1 PUC Water System Capital Improvement Project 
(CIP) staff positions. According to Mr. Harlan Kelly Jr. of 
the PUC, the PUC intends to lease space at 1145 Market 
Street in order to accommodate 89 additional Water System 
CIP staff persons, to be hired by the PUC (see Comment 



1 As stated on Page 2 of Attachment II provided by Mr. Harlan Kelly Jr. of the PUC, "Currently the 
CIP group occupies approximately 274 spaces at 1155 Market (212 Budgeted Filled Positions, 9 
positions from other City Departments, 36 consultants and 17 student interns) in approximately 
48,318 rentable square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 176 rentable square 
feet per person." There is no space allocated for 77 existing PUC positions which are currently 
vacant, according to Mr. Kelly. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

69 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



No. 1). As stated on Page 1 of Attachment II provided by 
Mr. Kelly, "Due to the time parameters and exacting 
conditions of the new CIP schedule, additional staff 
resources are needed which require the leasing of 
additional space to accommodate this increase in CIP staff." 
According to Mr. Kelly, under the proposed lease, the PUC 
would lease 30,790 rentable square feet of space in the 
building at 1145 Market Street at a rental cost of 
$64,145.83 monthly (approximately $2.08 per square foot), 
or $769,750 annually ($25.00 per square foot), to provide 
space for a total of 115 Water System CIP positions. 



Comments: Space Needs 

1. As shown on Page 1 of Attachment II, the Water System 
CIP currently has (a) 289 budgeted positions consisting of 
212 filled PUC positions and 77 vacant PUC positions, (b) 
nine positions from other City Departments, (c) 36 
consultants, and (d) 17 student intern positions associated 
with the Water System CIP, for a total of 351 positions. 
Mr. Kelly reports that the PUC anticipates adding 12 new 
PUC positions, for a total of 363 positions in the Water 
System CIP. Mr. Kelly further reports that the PUC 
anticipates hiring an additional 89 staff persons to fill the 
77 vacant positions and 12 new positions in the Water 
System CIP. 

Mr. Kelly advises that of the 12 new positions, six will be 
included in the FY 2004-2005 budget and six are included 
in the supplemental appropriation as discussed in the 
Budget Analyst's March 24, 2004 report to the Finance and 
Audits Committee under Files 04-0094 and 04-0095. The 
Budget Analyst notes that of the six positions included in 
the supplemental appropriation, the Budget Analyst is 
recommending approval of only three positions (see Files 
04-0094 and 04-0095). 

Attachment III, provided by Mr. Kelly, provides further 
details about the (i) 212 filled PUC positions, (ii) 77 vacant 
PUC positions, (hi) 12 new PUC positions, (iv) 36 
consultants, and (v) nine positions from other City 
Departments. 2 As shown in the table on Page 2 of 
Attachment II, the PUC anticipates accommodating 



2 Attachment III does not provide further information on the 17 student intern positions. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

70 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



approximately 115 staff persons in the proposed subject 
leased space at 1145 Market Street out of the total 
anticipated staff of 363 positions. The remaining 248 staff 
persons would be located at 1155 Market Street, occupying 
48,318 square feet of space, for a total of 363 Water System 
CIP staff persons to be located in both buildings. 
Currently, there are 274 Water System CIP positions now 
located at 1155 Market Street. According Mr. Kelly, the 
reason that there would only be 248 Water System CIP 
positions at 1155 Market Street if the proposed lease is 
approved, resulting in a reduction of 26 positions, or 9.5 
percent, is because more square feet per employee is 
needed. The square footage per employee would increase 
from 176 square feet per person to 195 square feet per 
person. 

2. As stated on Page 2 of Attachment II, the PUC currently 
accommodates approximately 274 Water System CIP staff 
persons at 1155 Market Street. Mr. Kelly reports that the 
274 Water System CIP staff occupy approximately 48,318 
rentable square feet of office space at 1155 Market Street, 
or an approximate average of 176 rentable square feet per 
CIP staff person. As shown in Attachment II, once the 77 
vacant positions are filled and 12 new positions are hired, 
increasing the total Water System CIP staff to 363 persons, 
Mr. Kelly reports that: 

• Approximately 248 Water System CIP staff persons, 
which is 26 staff persons less than the current 274 
Water System CIP staff persons, will be accommodated 
in the approximately 48,318 square feet of office space 
at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 195 rentable 
square feet per CIP staff person. 

• The remaining approximately 115 Water System CIP 
staff persons (total of 363 less 248) will be 
accommodated in the approximately 26,684 rentable 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

71 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



square feet of office space 3 at the proposed subject leased 
space at 1145 Market Street, or an average of 232 rentable 
square feet per CIP staff person. 

As stated on Page 3 of Attachment II, "For comparison, the 
Real Estate Division reports that the Department of Public 
Works has approximately 250 rentable square feet per 
person for similar space usage at the leased facility at 30 
Van Ness." 

Attachment II explains that the average rentable square 
footage per person at 1145 Market Street will be greater 
than the average rentable square footage per person at 
1155 Market Street because of different office and cubicle 
space configurations and different common area space 
needs. 

The table below provides a summary comparison of (a) the 
current Water System CIP staffing and rental space under 
the existing lease at 1155 Market Street, and (b) the 
proposed staffing and rental space at 1155 Market Street 
and 1145 Market Street if the proposed lease at 1145 
Market Street is approved by the Board of Supervisors. 





1145 Market St. 


1155 Market St. 


Current Occupied Space 






No. of Rentable 
Square Feet 


- 


48,318 


Total Existing CIP Staff 


- 


274 


Rentable Square 
Feet Per Employee 


- 


176 s.f. 








Proposed Occupied Space 






No. of Rentable 
Square Feet 


26,684 


48,318 


Total Proposed CIP Staff 


115 


248 


Rentable Square 
Feet Per Employee 


232 s.f. 


195 s.f. 



3 According to Mr. Kelly, of the 30,790 rentable square feet of leased space at the proposed 1145 
Market Street facility, 26,684 rentable square feet will be occupied by the Water System CIP staff 
consisting of 115 positions. The remaining 4,106 rentable square feet on the 4 th floor will be occupied 
by the SFPUC Planning Division. Mr. Romani notes that the SFPUC Planning Division has been 
leasing approximately 4,837 rentable square feet on the 4 th floor under a separate lease since April of 
1996. If the subject proposed lease is approved by the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Kelly advises that 
35 PUC Planning Division positions would occupy approximately 8,943 square feet of space (4,837 
square feet plus 4,106 square feet), or approximately 256 square feet per person. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 
72 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



3. The Budget Analyst notes that, as shown in Attachment 
III, the PUC anticipates filling its 77 vacant positions and 
12 new positions progressively from March of 2004 through 
June of 2005. Attachment V, provided by Mr. Kelly is a 
memorandum describing the justification for the space at 
both 1145 Market Street and 1155 Market Street. 

Leasehold Improvements 

4. The estimated total leasehold improvements cost of 
$1,094,008, consists of approximately $542,906 for tenant 
improvements, or approximately $17.63 per square foot, 
approximately $458,732 for 94 workstation units, or $4,880 
each, and a maximum of $92,370 for architectural fees, as 
shown in Attachment I. Based on negotiations, the Lessor 
would pay $369,480 ("Allowance") in leasehold 
improvement costs, or 58.2 percent of the tenant 
improvements and architectural fees estimated to cost a 
total of $635,276 (excluding the $458,732 for workstation 
units). The City would reimburse the Lessor for any costs 
exceeding $369,480, up to $724,528, resulting in a total 
maximum cost of $1,094,008 in leasehold improvements 
($369,480 plus $724,528). According to Ms. Hazel Brandt 
of the City Attorney's Office, under the provisions of the 
subject lease, in no event shall the City's share exceed 
$724,528. 

5. As noted above, the subject lease agreement requires 
that the lessor complete the leasehold improvements. 
According to Ms. Brandt, under provisions of the subject 
lease, the lessor would prepare final plan specifications and 
pricing plans related to the tenant improvements, which 
are subject to the City's prior approval. Ms. Brandt advises 
that the lessor is obligated under the subject lease to 
construct the leasehold improvements in accordance with 
City approved construction documents. 

Budget 

6. Attachment IV, provided by Mr. Kelly, contains a budget 
and all funding sources for all costs associated with the 
subject lease, totaling $2,385,471. Mr. Kelly reports that of 
the $2,385,471 total cost, $221,734 would be from funds 
previously appropriated by the Board of Supervisors during 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

the FY 2003-2004 budget, and $2,163,737 would be funded 
from the $16,719,301 pending supplemental appropriation 
request under File 04-0094. 



7. According to Mr. Kelly, the rent cost of $231,244, as 
shown in the Attachment IV budget, is based on estimated 
move-in dates that are staggered between February 1, 2004 
and June 30, 2004. Mr. Romani advises that the subject 
lease for the entire 30,790 rentable square feet is expected 
to commence on May 1, 2004, if the tenant improvements 
are completed. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends 
reducing the rent cost from $231,244 to $128,292, or by 
$102,952 to reflect the estimated May 1, 2004 lease 
commencement date. The Budget Analyst's recommended 
rent cost of $128,292 for FY 2003-2004 is based on a 
monthly rent cost of $64,145.83 x two months of rent (May 
and June) in FY 2003-2004. This recommendation is 
reflected in the Budget Analyst's report in File 04-0094. 

8. The budget contains $426,162 for the cost of furniture, 
which includes $39,765 to furnish five Manager's Offices, or 
$7,953 per Manager's Office, and $228,698 to furnish 41 
Standard Offices, or $5,578 per Standard Office, as shown 
on Page 2 and 3 of Attachment IV. The Budget Analyst 
recommends reducing the cost of furniture b3' $107,451, 
from $426,162 to $318,711, to reflect a more reasonable 
estimate of such furniture costs. The Budget Analyst's 
recommended cost of furniture totaling $318,711 is based 
on estimates obtained online for comparable furniture. The 
estimates obtained online include (a) the cost of one 
manager's office desk at $947 versus the PUC's budgeted 
cost of $4,000, (b) the cost of one standard office lateral file 
cabinet at $326 versus the PUC's budgeted cost of $700, 
and (c) the cost of one manager's shelf at $129 versus the 
PUC's budgeted cost of $300. This recommendation is 
reflected in the Budget Analyst's report in File 04-0094. 



uptions to Kenew 

9. The proposed lease agreement includes two five-year 
options to renew the lease with all of the same provisions of 
the proposed subject lease agreement, with the exception of 
the rent. Mr. Romani advises that under the proposed 
lease, if the City chooses to exercise one or both of its two 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

74 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



five-year options to renew, the monthly rental payment 
would be 95 percent of the prevailing market rate, which 
would be determined by the lessor. However, if the City 
disputes the lessor's determination, the prevailing market 
rate would be determined by either the average of two 
independent appraisers, or by a third independent 
appraiser, to be retained by both parties. 

Fair Market Value 

10. Mr. Romani states in Attachment I that, "It is the 
opinion that considering all factors, the flat rent of $25 per 
square foot, which includes full services but does not 
contain any operating expense pass-throughs, represents 
fair market value." 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



> 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

75 



City and County of San Francisco 




Pag ej of 2 

Real Estate Division 
Administrative Services Department 



♦ 



MEMORANDUM 



March 9, 2004 



TO: 



Leanne Nhan 

Budget Analyst's Office 



FROM: Jerry Romani/^j^- 

Principal Real Property Officer 

SUBJECT: PUC Leasehold Improvement Budget/Tenant Improvement Cost 
Estimates for Lease at 1 145 Market St., San Francisco 

Source of Funds (Leasehold Improvement Work Budget*) 

Landlord's Allowance: S369,480 

City's Contribution: S 724.52S 

TOTAL 51,094,008 

Estimated Budget (Contractor's Cost Estimates for Leasehold Improvement Work) 

Tenant Improvements: 5542,906 

Workstations (94): 5458,732 

Architectural Fees (max.) S 92.370 

TOTAL 51,094,008 



Rent Cost 



It is the opinion that considering all factors, the flat rent of 525 per square foot which 
includes full services but does not contain any operating expense pass-throughs, 
represents fair market value. 



(415)554-9850 
FAX: (415)552-9216 



76 



Office of the Director of Property 
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 400 



San Francisco, 94102 



Page 2 ot 2 

















TENANT IMPROVEMENTS | 








1145 MARKET STREET -PUC FLOORS 1,4,8 and 10 








BID PROPOSAL HARD COST BREAKDOWN 
































General Cond 


tions 


$ 33,852 




Demo 


I 


$ 20,800 




Carpentry 




$ 17,936 




Millwork 




NIC 




Doors/Frms/Hardwre 


$ 23,155 




Stone ceramic tile 


NIC 




Toilet Accessories 


NIC 




Giass and Giazing 


$ 9,425 




Drywall 


$ 39,568 




Acoustic Ceiling 


$ 12,382 




Floor Covering 


$ 103,210 




Painting /wallcovering 


$ 42,527 




HVAC| 


$ 22,470 




Plumbing 


$ 6,678 




Fire Protection 


$ 9,176 




Electrical/Life safety 


$ 71,196 




Final Clean 


$ 6,500 




Permit Fees 


$ 8,500 




Signage/keys/FEC 


$ 3,000 




Blinds 






NIC 














TOTAL: 




$ 430,375 




FEE (5%) 




$ 21,519 




i 






SUB TOTAL: 




$ 451,894 




CONTINGENCY 10% 


$ 45,189 




Code Change Orders* 


$ 45,823 












GRAND TOTAL: 


$ 542,906 




I I 






Note: I he Code Change Orders ac 


counts for any escalating costs due to reasons 


such as increased building 




permit fees, any additional w 


ork required by City plan checkers or onsite ins 


pectors not shown 




on the working drawings, po 


Bsible relocation of existing HVAC ducts, sprink 


sr heads, etc. 







































BID PROPOSAL FORM 3/9/04 




water 

hetch hetchy 
water a power 



Gavin Nsivsom 
Mayor 

E Dennis Normandy 
rre&dsnt 

Rosen J Costello 
Vice President 

Commis.?ion9rs: 
Ann Moller Caen 
Adam Wertacn 
Ryan L. Brooks 

Falrioa E. Manel 
General Manager 

Harlan L Kelly, Jr. 
Assistant General 
Manager 
Infrastructure 



Attachment II 
Page 1 of 4 
s a n Francisco Public Utilities Commission 

Office erf the Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure 
1155 Marxet Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco. California 941 03 
Tel. (415) 554-0740 • Fax (415) 554-2456 ■ Email HK6lly@Srwater.org 



MEMORANDUM 




TO: Leanne Nhan DATE: 

Budgei Analyst 



FROM: Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. SUBJECT: 

Assistant Genera] Manager 



March 8, 2004 



CIP Support Costs: 
Increase in 
Office Space 



Background: 

The reorganization of the Infrastructure Division that manages the CIP is intended to 
make roles and responsibilities explicit, enhance organizational capacity, and foster 
cross-disciplinary interactions to increase and ensure staff productivity. The overall 
objective is to incorporate flexibility and agility into the organizational structure in order 
to meet the rapidly changing demands of a long-term, large-scale, multi-juiisdictional 
program such as the CIP. Due to the time parameters and exacting conditions of the new 
CIP schedule, additional staff resources are needed which require the leasing of 
additional space to accommodate this increase in CIP staff. 

Staffing Budget: 

With 289 budgeted positions, 62 consultants/students, and 12 new positions, SFPUC will 
need approximately 363 spaces to accommodate all positions as projected below. 



PUC Budgeted Positrons Filled 212 

PUC Budgeted Vacant Positions 77 

Total Budgeted Positions 



289 



Consultants 
Student Interns 
Staff from 

Other City Departments 
Subtotal 



36 

17 



62 



New Positions - Supplemental 
New Positions - FY 04-05 Budget 
Total New Positions 

Total CIP Positions Projected 



12 

262 



78 



ml iflLniiient &i 
Page 2 of 4 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 2 
March 8, 2004 



There are 36 consultants of which 5 consultants are involved in training and organizational development 
and 31 consultants provide the CIP with continued administrative, financial and system support. There 
are 9 staff persons from other City departments to provide administrative, financial and system support. 
There are 17 interns, 4 high school student interns from the Mayor's Office Project Pull program and 13 
SFPUC student engineer interns. 

At this time the staffing projections are based on current information on project schedules. SFPUC 
anticipates that the 77 vacant and 12 new positions will be filled by June 2005 given the approval of the 
1 145 Market St. lease and the timing of the City wide hiring process. 



Increase in Office Space: 

In September 2003 the SFPUC completed its consolidation of administrative staff from various locations 
into the office building at 1 155 Market St. Currently the CIP group occupies approximately 274 spaces 
(212 Budgeted Filled Positions, 9 positions from other City Departments, 36 consultants and 17 student 
intem positions) in approximately 4S,313 square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 176 
rentable square feet per person. 

Since SFPUC staff occupies the entire building at 1155 Market St., it would be efficient to lease the 
available 30,790 square feet in the adjacent office building at 1 145 Market St. to accommodate the hiring 
of the 77 vacant and 12 new positions. SFPUC is expecting that 24S spaces will be required at 1155 
Market St. and 115 CTP spaces at 1145 Market, for a total of 363 spaces, as shown. 

Based on expected full staffing date of June 30, 2005. 





1155 

Market 


1145 
Market 


Total 


Budgeted 
Positions * 


218 


35 


301 


Consultants & 
Students 


1 
30 32 


62 


Total Spaces 


248| 115 


363 



Staffing at 1 155 Market St.: 

The technical divisions of the CIP (engineering, construction management and project management) are 
expected to remain in 1155 Market Street. The approximately 43,3 IS square feet of space divided by the 
required 248 spaces yields 195 rentable square feet per person. 



79 



Page 3 of 4 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 3 
March 8, 2004 



Staffing at 1145 Market St.: 

The administrative and program development and support divisions of the CIP are expected to relocate to 
1 145 Market from 1 155 Market Street. Since SFPUC Planning Department will be occupying the 4* 
Floor at 1145 Market St., the 4 th floor is not included in the analysis. The total square footage at 1145 
Market St. is as follows: 







1st 


6,541 


8th 


11,305 


10th 


8,838 


26,684 


14th 


4,106 


Total 


30,790 



The floors available to the CIP group include the 1", 8* and lO 01 of which space will be needed for 115 
positions consisting of 57 filled budgeted positions, 26 vacant budgeted positions and 32 consultants. 
Common space will also be required on each floor for a conference room, training room, reception area, 
break room and a storage room. The CIP group's 26,684 square feet (excluding the 4.106 square feet on 
4 m floor space occupied by the Planning Dept.) divided by the required 115 spaces yields approximately 
232 square feet per person. 

As noted, currently the CIP staff at 1 155 Market St. occupies approximately 176 rentable square feet per 
person. For comparison, ihe Real Estate Division reports that the Department of Public Worlcs has 
approximately 250 rentable square feet per person for similar space usage at the leased facility at 30 Van 
Ness Ave. 

Below is a comparison of the average square foot per person at each building. 





Proposed at 
1155 Market St. 


Proposed at 
1145 Market St 


Total Square 
Footage 


48,318 


26,684* 


Total Employees 


24S 


115 


Average SF 


195 sf 


232 sf 



The positions and square footage in the table above 

does not include the 4,106 sf space used by the PUC Planning Department. 



80 



Page 4 of 4 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 4 
March 8, 2004 



Explanation of Difference in Square Footage between 1145 and 1155 Market: 

1. There are approximately 30 and 35 built-in offices located at 1 145 and 1155 Market St. 
respectively. Since there will be more cubicle spaces for the engineering staff at 1155 Market St. 
than at 1 145 Marker St., where the administrative and executive staff will be located, the square 
footage per person required at 1 155 Market St. should be lower than 1145 Market St. 

2. Contract administration and operations will be located at 1 145 Market St. There will be larger 
conference rooms required to conduct the bidding meetings as well as additional storage for 
contract files. Additionally there will be a counter space serving as the reception area for the 
contracts department to meet with the public. 

3. CJP Public Outreach and the Training Division will be located at 1 145 Market St.. There will be 
conference rooms required to hold public meetings and training sessions. 



81 



List of Filled Positions 



Page 1 of 



Class 


ritle 


Name 






7 |5166 | 


^GM Infrastructure 


Harlan Kelly Jr. 


2 


5189 


Manager, UEB, PUC 


Mike Quan (Acting) 


3 


0941 


Manager VI 


Carol Isen 


4 


0941 


Manager VI 


Jeet Bajwa 


5 


1372 


Special Assistant XIII 


Marge Layne 


6 


1404 I 


Clerk 


Abel Zamarripa 


7 


1404 Clerk 


Delia Quintero 


8 11404 Clerk 


Isaac Tarn 


9 [1404 


Clerk 


Joean Wright 


10 11406 


Sr. Clerk 


Cesar Borja 


7 7 11406 


Sr. Clerk 


Curtis Allen 


12 11406 


Sr. Clerk 


Phyllis Porter 


73 |1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Tina Panziera 


14 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Wayne Ollila 


15 


1410 


Chief Clerk 


Sogra Kadir 


16 | 1424 


Clerk Typist 


Jade Quach 


17 | 1424 


Clerk Typist 


Karen Lim 


18 11426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Ceres de la Paz 


79 1 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Charlene De Dios 


20 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Fay Deconinck 


21 


1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Lisa Thomas 


22 


1426 iSr. Clerk Typist 


Moni Vibal 


23 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Peter Del Campo 


24 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Roberta Boyd 


25 J1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Trina Ramirez 


26 11446 


Secretary II 


Angela Chan 


27 1446 


Secretary II 


Connie Chang 


28 1 1446 


Secretary II 


Connie Gruber 


29 11446 


Secretary II 


Cynthia Dela Cruz 


30 11446 


Secretary II 


Feli Delgado 


37 '1446 


Secretary II 


Judith Meyer 


32 ;1446 


Secretary II 


Monica Menchini 


33 |1446 


Secretary II 


Pilar Salvador 


34 11446 


Secretary I! 


Shirley Simpliciano 


35 


1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Carmelita Navarro 


36 


1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Dibbie Yeung 


37 11450 


Exec Secretary I 


Gigi Borromeo 


38 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Jenny Lee 


39 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


LeeAnn Prifti 


40 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Marie Aure-Flierder 


41 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Nora Molina 


42 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Valencia Russell 


43 11452 


Exec Secretary II 


Brenda Jones 


44 1632 


Sr. Account Clerk 


Prince Hallowell 


45 1632 


Sr. Account Clerk 


Wendy Huang 


46 1634 


Principal Account Clerk 


Teresita Tina 


47 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Al Padua 


48 1 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Anna Wong 


49 


1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


I Bert Felix 


50 


1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


David Deasy 


57 


1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


David Letterman 


52 


1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Jim Howells 


53 H823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Jon Winge 


54 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Lee Okumoto 


55 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Linda Denari 


56 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Pauline Lam 


57 1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Rosiana Tamsil 



Page 1 of 4 



Attachment A 



82 



List of Filled Positions 



n l i a l inn e ii l hi 



Page 2 of 



Class Title Name 






58 1824 


Assistant To AGM 


Edgar Poma 


59 !1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Jan Darby 


60 


1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Lourdes Cunanan 


61 


1827 


Admini Services Manager 


John Cretan 


62 


1844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Diane Zagorites 


63 


1844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Evangelina Lim 


64 


1844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Joe Cowan 


65 


5133 


Program Manager II 


Wendy Iwata 


66 


5138 


Program Manager I 


Leonard Swanson 


67 


5162 


Program Manager III 


Boon Lim 


68 


5162 


Program Manager III 


Susan Yee (Acting) 


69 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Jack Lin 


70 !5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Jose Calle 


71 J5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Joseph Buitrago 


72 


5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Napoleon calimlim 


73 


5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Noreen Chan 


74 ;5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Renee Rosario 


75 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Annie Li 


76 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Carol De Graca 


77 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Deidre Appel 


78 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Enriqusta Reyes 


79 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Ernie Barrientos 


80 | 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Garret Low 


81 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jack Wu 


82 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jean Botro 


83 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jeanne Sum 


84 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Lawrence So 


85 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Sam Chan 


86 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Sarah Blain 


87 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Thomas Jung 


88 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Yoli Quisao 


89 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Allen Lim 


90 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Chiu Lui 


91 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Duk-Soo Choi 


92 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Eric Gee 


93 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ernie Ricardo 


94 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Gino Grundy 


95 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Henry Kwan 


96 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jaime Ramirez 


97 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


James Sakai 


98 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jeannie Mak 


99 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jeff Young 


100 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


I Joseph Chan 


101 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Kirit Bovishi 


102 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Leroy Gullette 


103 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Louis Schuman 


104 (5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Mai Huan 


105 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Manuel Rodriquez 


106 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Mary Jim 


107 !5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


i Michael Tennant 


108 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


On-Si Lam 


109 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Paul Louie 


110 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Pravin Shelat 


111 I5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ralph Leong 


112 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


i Robert Tonjes 


773 | 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


j Roger Tarn 


I 114 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ron Yee 



Page 2 of 4 



Attachment A 



83 



List of Filled Positions 



Attachment II 
Page 3 of 8 



Class 


Title 


Name 




115 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Santokh Kahton 


116 5207 


Assoc. Engineer I Stephanie Wong 


117 :5207 


Assoc. Engineer Suzanne Melville 


118 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Tedman Lee 


119 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vivian Chow 


120 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Wilson Lew 


121 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Alan T. Wong 


122 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Allan Johanson (Acting) 


723 ;5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Bijan Ahnadzadeh 


724 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Bill Melia 


725 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Carol Finucane 


726 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Carolyn Chiu 


727 1 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Ernie Tom 


728 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Fonda Davidis 


729 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Frank Mangold 


730 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Gilbert Tang 


737 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Hector Mau 


732 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


John Hetzner 


733 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Luke Cheng 


734 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Mohammad Kohgadai 


735 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Patrick Lau 


736 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Saed Toloui 


737 5212 


Principal Engineer 


Don Chan 


733 5212 


Principal Engineer 


Kathy How 


739 5212 


I Principal Engineer 


Steve Maiolini 


740 15241 


Engineer 


Abdi Abdirahman 


747 5241 


! Engineer 


Albert Eng 


742 5241 


Engineer 


Albert Tom 


743 5241 


Engineer 


Alice Yan 


744 5241 


I Engineer 


Angus Y I Chen 


745 5241 


I Engineer 


Art Bree 


746 5241 


I Engineer 


; Barbara Palacios 


747 5241 


| Engineer 


Bill Wong 


748 15241 


| Engineer 


I David Hung 


749 5241 


Engineer 


David Quinones 


750 5241 


i Engineer 


; Francis McCormick 


757 5241 


| Engineer 


Joe Haas 


752 5241 


Engineer 


Kathleen Price 


753 5241 


I Engineer 


'Kevin Barteaux 


754 15241 


I Engineer 


'Kevin Costello 


755 5241 


: Engineer 


Mongkol Mahavongtrakul 


756 15241 


[Engineer 


Peter Cheng 


757 5241 


Engineer 


IRizal Villareal 


758 5241 


[Engineer 


Romeo Rombawa 


759 15241 


I Engineer 


Ruperto Gonzales 


760 |5241 


Engineer 


Thomas Hull 


767 5270 


'Sr. Architect 


Jim Buker 


762 15312 


Survey Assistant II 


Tom Checkowitz 


763 15314 


^Survey Associate 


|D. Buck 


764 5346 


Mechanical Engineering Assoc. I 


Fernando Delos Reyes 


765 15346 


Mechanical Engineering Assoc. I 


; lgor Gindin 


766 5354 


Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


James Fong 


767 5354 


'Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


Jose Nuguid 


168 5354 


Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


May Shao 


769 5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


Ping Ping Yuen 


770 5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


Posee Cheung 


7 77 5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


William Xie 



Page 3 of 4 



Attachment A 



34 



List of Filled Positions 



ft L Id l [MUCH L ill 



Page 4 of 



Class 


Title 


Name 




772 15364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Irene Yu 


173 5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Margarita McKinney 


174 I5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Tracy Cheong 


175 '5366 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Lawrence Tom 


176 ,5408 


Coordinator of CIP Outreach 


Lihmeei Leu 


177 :5502 


Project Manager I 


Bessie Tarn 


178 5502 


Project Manager I 


Bryan Dessaure 


179 5502 


Project Manager I 


Johnny Wong 


180 :5502 


Project Manager I 


Ryan Cayabyab 


787 5504 


Project Manager II 


Calvin Huey 


782 ,5504 


Project Manager II 


Johnson Lim 


783 ,5504 


Project Manager II 


Kate Read 


784 5504 


Project Manager II 


Lota DeCastro 


785 5504 


Project Manager II 


Tasso Mavroudis 


786 5504 


Project Manager II 


Tracy Cael 


787 ,5506 


Project Manager III 


Chris Nelson 


788 5506 


Project Manager III 


Howard Fung 


789 5506 


Project Manager III 


Johanna Wong 


790 5506 


Project Manager III 


Manfred Wong 


797 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Affredo Joves 


792 |6318 


Construction Inspector 


Allan Wong 


793 !6318 


Construction Inspector 


Arnold Galang 


794 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Benjamin Leong 


795 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Brian Roberts 


796 6318 


Construction Inspector 


i Carl Lee 


797 16318 


Construction Inspector 


! Carlos Grande 


798 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Cosmo Tarantino 


799 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Dinesh Chaudari 


200 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Ed Pacero 


207 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Gerry Fields 


202 6318 


Construction Inspector 


i Jerry Malone 


203 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Jose Poncel 


204 6318 


Construction inspector 


Kay Lee 


205 6318 


Construction Inspector 


iKirkKuykendall 


206 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Larry Olsen 


207:6318 


Construction Inspector 


Ron Adams 


208 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Tim Meagher 


209 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Tim Parkan 


210 6318 


Construction Inspector 


:Tom Famham 


277 6318 


Construction Inspector 


I Ward Wong 


272 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Wyman Lee 





Page 4 of 4 



Attachment A 



85 



List of Vacant and New Positions 



n l l d v. mmi e ii l 111 



Page 5 of 



Class 


Title 


Name 


Bureau 


Expected 
□ate of 
Hire 












7 


0922 


Manager I 


Vacant-Priority 


CMB 


Mar-04 


2 | 


0922 


Manager I 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


3 


0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


Apr-04 


4 0933 


Manager V 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


Apr-04 


5 12917 


Program Support Analyst 


Vacant-Priority * 


AGM 


Apr-04 


6 1 2975 


Citizens Complaint Officer 


Vacant-Priority ** 


AGM 


Apr-04 


7 | 0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Apr-04 


8 1452 


Exec Secretary II 


Vacant-Priority 


AGM 


Apr-04 


9 1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Priority 


IRM 


Apr-04 


10 0931 


Manager III 


Vacant-Priority 


AGM 


Apr-04 


77 0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


CMB 


Apr-04 


12 0933 


Manager V Vacant-Priority 


IRM 


Apr-04 


73 10941 


Manager VI 


Vacant-Priority 


IRM 


Apr-04 


14 1 0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


75 I5508 


Project Manager IV 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


76 15241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


17 | 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


78 :5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


19 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


20 '5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


27 15241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


22 5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


23 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


24 5174 


Administrative Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


25 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


26 |5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


27 


5344 


Mechanical Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


28 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


29 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


30 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


37 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


32 J5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


33 1 5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


34 15241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


35 1 5502 


Project Manager I 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


36 | 5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


37 | 5344 


Mechanical Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


38 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


39 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


40 (5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


47 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


42 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


43 | 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


44 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


45 


1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Vacant-Hold 


IRM 


by Jun-05 


46 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


47 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


48 


5506 


Project Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


49 


5506 


Project Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


50 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


57 5506 


Project Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


52 1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


53 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


54 I5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


55 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 



Page 1 of 2 



Attachment B 



List of Vacant and New Positions 



Attachment III 
Page 6 of 8 





Class 


Title 


Name 


Bureau 


Expected 
Date of 
Hire 


56 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


57 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


58 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


59 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


60 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


67 


5268 


Architect 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


62 


5366 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


63 


5366 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


64 


5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


65 


5504 


Project Manager II 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


66 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


67 


6318 


Construction Inspector 


Vacant-Hold 


CMB 


by Jun-05 


68 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


69 


5270 


Sr. Architect 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


70 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


71 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


72 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


73 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


74 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


75 


1452 


Exec Secretary II 


Vacant-Hold 


AGM 


by Jun-05 


76 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


CMB 


by Jun-05 


77 


1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Hold 


IRM 


by Jun-05 














1 


0941 


Manager VI 


New -Sup Budget 


AGM 


Apr-04 


2 


0942 


Manager VII 


New -Sup Budget 


CMB 


Apr-04 


3 


5293 


Planner IV 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 
Apr-04 


4 


5298 


Planner Ill-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


5 


5298 


Planner Ill-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


i PDS 


Apr-04 


6 


5299 


Planner IV-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 


7 


0941 


Manager VI 


i New 


PDS 


Apr-04 


8 


0923 


Manager II 


I New 


IRM 


Jul-04 


9 


9922 


PSA-Assoc. to Professional 


New 


IRM 


Jul-04 


10 


5602 


Utility Specialist 


New 


PDS 


Jul-04 


11 


5602 


Utility Specialist 


New 


PDS 


Jul-04 


12 


5602 


Utility Specialist 


|New 


PDS 


Jul-04 



Page 2 of 2 



Attachment B 87 



List of Consultants 



Attachment 1 1 1 
Page / of B 



Training/Org Development 




1 WIP [PhilKohne ' AGM 








2 IWIP 


Rosie Rios 


AGM 








3 


WIP 


Ted Wisnia 


AGM 








4 


WIP IVitalyTroyan 


AGM 








5 iWIP I Jessica Romm 


AGM 






















CIP Support 












1 


WIP 


Alex Martinez 


IRM 








2 


WIP 


Margaret Berry 


IRM 








3 


WIP 


Deepalaxmi Rasaikar 


PDS 








4 |WIP Dennis Johnson 


PDS 








5 | WIP Fang Lee 


PDS 








6 WIP Jerome Hou ! PDS 








7 IWIP JohnMariey PDS 








8 WIP kora Bowman PDS 








9 WIP IMarkSpomer 


PDS 








10 IWIP I Michael Kane 


PDS 








11 


WIP I Patrick Collins 


PDS 








12 


WIP RudyGeronimo 


PDS 








13 


WIP |Voge Ayran 


PDS 








14 JWIP I Charles Campbell 


PMB 








15 |WIP 


Christine Uy 


PMB 








76 IWIP 


Derrick Wong 


PMB 








17 WIP George Martinez ' PMB 








18 IWIP 


Joe Hill 


PMB 








19 IWIP 


Luann McVicker 


PMB 








20 IWIP | Susan Hou 


PMB 








21 


WIP 


Tanya Yurovsky 


PMB 








22 


WMS 


Donna Courington 


PDS 








23 


WMS 


Margaret Weiland 


PDS 
























WIP Support 










1 


WIP PaulSpickard 










2 


WIP I Maggie Pinto 










3 


WIP JMylene Madarang 










4 


WIP I Chris Martinez 










5 


WIP I Les Tift 










6 


WIP Jeanne Marz 










7 


WIP ikarineh Gregorian 










8 


WIP 


Lin Koh 
























Total Consultants 


36 






































'Five consultants would provid training and development services, and 






3i consultants would provide administrative, financial and system support services. 



Attachment C 



88 



List of Positions from Other City Departments 



Attachment III 
Page 8 of « 



1 


Edgar Poma 


DPW 


2 


Carmelita Navarro 


DPW 


3 


Jennie Lee 


DPW 


4 


Jim Buker 


DPW 


5 


Jocelyn Quintos 


DPW 


6 


Lourdes Nicomedes 


DPW 


7 


Karen Watson 


Airport 


8 


Anne Godfrey 


Prop F 


9 


Don Munakata 


Prop F 



*To provide adminstrative, financial and system support. 



89 




Water 

hetch hetchy 
Water & Power 

Clean Water 



Page 1 of 4 
San Francisco public Utilities Commission 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, INFRASTRUCTURE 
1155 Maital Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco, CA94103'Tel.: (415)554-0740- Fax: (415)554-2466 "TDD: (415)554-4388 



GAVIN NEWSOM 
MAYOR 

E. DENNIS NORMANDY 
PRESIDENT 

ROBERT J. COSTELLO 

VICE PRESIDENT 

ANN MOLLER CAEN 
ADAM WERBACH 
RYAN L. BROOKS 

PATRICIA E. MARTEL 

GENERAL MANAGER 

HARLAN 1_ KELLY, JR. 
ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER. 
INFRASTRUCTURE 



Summary Budget (Projected Total Moving Costs) 











Description 


Amount 


Funded 

from FY 03- 

04 Budget 


Suppl 
Request 


Rent 


231,244 




231.244 


Remodeling & Cubicles 


724,528 




724,528 


Computers & Monitors 


235,200 




235,200 


Furniture 


426,162 




426,162 


Other Equipment 


92,000 


92,000 





Other Office Supplies 


24,000 




24,000 


Other Materials & Supplies 


25,229 




25,229 


Network Equipment 


194,258 


100,991 


93,267 


1155 Market 


47,735 




47,735 


Telcom Eqpt & Wiring (DTIS) 


306,372 




306,372 


Movers 


28,743 


28,743 





Space Planning (DPW-BOA) 


50,000 




50,000 


Projected Total Move Costs ; 


2,163,737 



Note: Of the total $2,385,471, funding of $221,734 will come 
from the current FY 03-04 operating budget with the remaining 
$2,163,737 being requested through this supplemental 
appropriation. The detail budget listing of the furniture, 
equipment, supplies and leasehold improvements is included in 
Attachment E. 



Attachment F provides documentation on the leasehold 
improvements. 





1 1 Pa ~ 


jgfjgf© 

©sols 


01 


i&fe®8S| o 


m o 




oo o 




r-_ o n 








rsi rsi 










*;¥' :H1 




-•-.■ .5-. n.- 




.,-■„■! 1 iMBST! 




< ~ .-TOCO 00003COV1W-. 00=^-^ 


o sn o «n o o o o^noooomoo ooooooo 


— '-"'—, T *N O OCOOOO'O^Jr-iC^Ow-ir^^O 


or^or-Oolo»nc»w-iOfnr-icTs m*nciv-iOvno 


fi3^t^j>i — ', f ^i: l/ i' f i x °. »n m_ o_ o_ o. r- — c* — w-i — — r-^ 
^i3fe£!*$J '«;St:in o" — — " r-t m" m" rn c* 


•H ^ ^ ~ ^°- ^ "1 ™ "1 "1. ™_ 'H °- ^ ^ ^ °\ *\ *°.l ^ ^ 


o* — oo" r^ ^-" ^-" o" so* r*" — • "<t — —" oo" m" cT — * <*" — " — — ." 


r - .:^.';: ."! f) <S rn <N rn 




;-j /,-.'..: fs l- r-i 




■ a ;'..: ■■ 


















~->v - ' o 


T^^ttT^tTrTrTrTf-* m <j-i u-»|tn v-> so 




o •,;.■-.■■ 






HHB6 O ft O OOOOOOOOOsOOOOsO 

m so in oooocoo<nr-r-oso«no 


osnoinoooosnoooosnoo oottooo-^- 




or~or-ooovnooosor^r-)f--i ooooo-^-or^i 




...' t> '.-• * in o> o 'O « rsjr^ o n (N n n cs 
~^',H r-1 e> «n oo — — cm « in 


(Mr-r-sososou-t — cor^- — so»n— n ■vt n so m n o 




>o >a tt" n n" m o" n n" c4" r->* rs — " <n 




•5 -I _ ^ - ^ 


"*" "* z 




~°^£ : >o 




■e-rrr-'VL, 


^.'W'C^ 




: 3- : .-"-' " £ ^ NNNNNNNNN^ 








_.■■'■-. o 


C ,-- Ert 






DM — 






■ O OOOOo!olo*ntnoOOO»nr^ 


O«n0moooo*nooo0un r^co^r^ °i 1^1 




. l_ ^ O O O O O O ■ *n r-.j oo »-n O m p-.) u-i 


Or-or^ooo^tOOf^o^r-i r-i — - 




-rj ."-3. 1> "3- O ro r-n sO O : O — so — — O 


NNh-'O'Oin-- — 




2 •= i £1 <n t" 






"S-.'. :a - 
























W--D °° 






I rr'mlo ooooooommcoo olsn m 


osoomoooo»nsooo«nso cot ololc t 




iO «IO ooOOOO«nrstoomOr^rM»n 


0r^0r-000»n^ p, ^-0 — rMr-i OoooO'-q-lor-j 




. .j —3 1 — ■_ so_| r-^ o_ rn m so so ©^ — so ~- — c> 


•*TJ so_ cs C> r^ rsl_ sn wj_ — so r-_ m rr oo_ rs -t n »o NifN o_ 






r-* *t — " cS o" o" oo" fN rn — " T* cn" — m' 




ca ■- ; 1 rr in so 


















P '% - a 




2 


*— aJ cj 




E 






K:. 1 


Z). "'■ | ** 


1 1 1 ! 




w _ O'0 0i©00 0«nmooi0 0i«n,^ 

S^aSte U. S OlOOC;.c:c:»n(-ioorniOr^,r-j^ 

■ **• O ' m <--> ■ s£ i sO O — <;— — *n 


OtmO-noO'OOsnooOOso [C | So " [C po : M 
o:r-or-c:oio*noomO'-ics }-v, „ n " 






1 




ta '---. v D 


| 








'-'.VT. : '!-"- — OO OOOOO|OO*nu-i00OO*nm 


oJu-iosnoooom-^-joomTr ininloolsnlolsnoc 




p-- o <n o o o © ~ © m r^ oo -— > o m cn *n 


oirsiio r>i c O o ^i so i — i o cv r- rn rNim-ifi rn | p- o 




. . -c r^ o r*^ o c% m so so i o_ — so — — o_ 


soool— snioooom-q-w-i — ro r- olo t|m n n c 




.';'£ cm r-^ so rr" — r-" 


sO psl <— — — sO n (N 1 sO 










"E. J - 










o 


r-- w O 




.. tl 
















■? 


i-- : ... 


1 




_ 000000©mmoooO»n_ 
! — 5 OOOOOO!mr-tC0r-->O'-nCs| n 2 
l Li. jn O m m sO «0 O' — so — — jn 






^ ■ - |W ™ ^ 


p.. <NI--0>0^ 
















&M£ ' ,* 


i i i ill 




1 OrNO Ol00i0000«n»noo00»n'^ 






I — OO ©'©©©©O^nr-ioo-— > o ■ m c-t «n 


1 cj ' «n r- i r-i . cs i r- -t 




_-o | |r-^isojoo_ q: rn n o >o o_ — so — — c\ 


ii . i i i i { • | • • i | i i | • i 'n|Miwr>'s3im t 




■-'3 r^irsTioo -a-" — r-" 


sOJTf i-i : 2 




-. -- '.« ■-.: 1 isO — «n 












£ 'vr c 




_§ 


h -d'u 








E 


9 B s a - 










. ' ' """ 


ntir: S . || 


! ' | ! ! 1 ' 




C'OO l OOOOm-noooO"n 


'1 | | isnisrvco.-nio,^ 




_..., — £ O'OOOOOw-iOlOOr^-, O-— iir-jf*} 






•a - . ^ u. 12 om-— tsosoo — so— — ^? 

u2 : '-i''"5 S 8 


i n i T 

! | ! j 1 




^S M ' 












M o % 






gS 2 ^" 1 


}#, ! | 




m * P' 


I 

„ 1 1 1 , i 




a u 1 1 1 




1 '1 i « it 




1 i its a |s |-aui s 


■g (3 |S J "I * s -g LS ^1°^ 




." Ji e -a _ Sol S @ "I-T3 _ IjU § 






_^| c 2 : ' > ■ u « t - , !° ja |'-' 1 t!.EiS — "3 g ,=a: - S.£ ! " — 




oj I b 1 S 1 S Q 1 J 1 «n 1 U 1 h- ulS'uJ'^ I Oo 3- w 


Q 1 uj 1 3 \ vt 1 o 1 H ^^•-^.^C' = , o-|i^^.^:^.r^c- 



91 



ISP 


1 1 1 Page 3 


Mil 


*•- | m 


1 g of ^ 


iSi^SI 


r- o o o o o B B 




vo o so in o o \o 99 


Si 




— ; vi on as © o j* jtrfl 

vi vo" vT V cT aC E &ol .^ 

M * s 1 m 


fV'i 




11 f 


^v;^ 


or-or^ ooo ooo ooo o a oo o o o coo -oo cMf-im 




© so © so ooo o o -o o © m o o oo o o o owivi m r^i t -fr 




°. °. **">. *~i °_ "i "■* °_ °v °v ■ ' °v °- °i °_ ' °. °°- c ! ' ' °. ' ' « ' ' °°. °. — . t. r* t. °i jti 








r>4 rs m rsi cn ~~ *r m so tt r-a (S ©Vo o ts 


|| 


f i ~\ "1 




, 


T — m — — T rsi n co in e*-i © m m ^ r- 




5 - r =. 






■Z : 






~3 " 






o ■■■ 

-• -•■. 








OOOO OOO OOOOO O O O O O O O a\ so OO 




oooo ooo u-iou-ioo o o o o o tn m m oo m 




"'S ' 


q q vi in i i i ©^ tj- -<r ' ■ so o_ so in in ^ ' ' °_ ' ' °. ' "1 °. ^ ^ °° "I °° 






c* <*i ri — — —."—*' r-^ oo" in* ©* so" so" o" cs" oo" 










^ E _ 




2. 


=?"!■= 








i= 


a 


— O — wn 


- 


-S 


■" 1 






—,-_,!_ oooooooooo OO 






2 2 2 oooooooooo o oi 






— oo sor-osooooooo o ^f 






o^r-^m — ooor-O'nor^so 






C*. CS in — rs) 




2. £ 


1 










aj • 3 








OOOO OOO O © © © © O O O O OOOO C\|soloo|o 






OOOO OChCs O © oi © © O O O O O o 01 O Ol oo I fs. 1 




13 


O O vi »n iii ^j. ^ i » \o o so o. o vo^ in ' ' ©_ ■ ' ©^ ' ' — q^r 1; cn j c^_ csji rn 














a E _ 




5 


£'!«! 


1 




_ — ino© — ©© — oo — — 






— o — <^ 


pC 


•£ 




oo 


D ' ' 








_,_, _ o o ooo a o[o o ooo' £ 






- 5 O OOOIU-iOOO.OOIO O u-i J> 






ooo or-ooooO'Oooo^r A 




*° u 


Oil — ooor-Ou-,OrMO A 




1 '-z 


Ov N <N — IN 

1 | Tf 






! i ' 






IO o oo ooo OOOO o o oooo— 1 ojo 






'0|0 OO OCsO OOOO O O O O *n VI rsj ; o,o 






S'O m m ... ^ -n- i i i i ■ v-, ^ ^q i . ^ i ■ o_ ' ' so_ o_ ^r rr r^ ' *n| — 






los'lm" rsi" — — — r-" co" sn" — " o" so* so" rMir<« 










1:1 5 


1 


o 


b-w-C 


1 ... .... ! ... 1 


T > ••■":£ 


■/, 


' — — ooo — oo — oo — — | 








5 


-§ 


i i 






,_J_ „_ OOOOOOOO O'O olo 






= o_ oooooooooo olw-> 






— ; o o sor-osooooooo O ' T 




1 E 


q n ^ — ooor-omo'r-j sol 
Os rsi cn — p«*! 




7, 'c 






. 


, i i I 
or- r— ooo ooo ooo ' © o oo o o ' © oloo cm^ o:c 






— O JD OOO O C^- C\ i/-i©U"l O O OO ©1 !Oi | o o ' O O nil- -iO 




— 


o_ so_ ' sq_ o_ w-i_ o q t -t ■ * so o_ sq^ ' <n in so_ o_ ' ' ©j ' ' toj ' i ' ^o_ o_i oo_ oa_ l 00 .!* - . s0 _' "^ 
















3 1 1 


1 


_- _.| 


*-■ i3 C 


1 1 II 




■» in o o in oo ?~ ^. r: — = o i o — o o ■ — o o 3, — : ■» »S1 1 


• i 


5 


I I " 1 I ! I 1 ! 






o r- o ©l© © in ooo'/-, ■, — -oo — ooo. oooo f. o o jfi , 

©so ©1© otj- OOr^rsJ aO© HE O Otolvi O O O O O'O % o w-» 2n 
©iso o|m psirsi soomi— |ga — ^ sor-OisoooooO'O ;!dO ^ ■.'-g* i 








Iil 




1 1 1 1 1 1 






1 1 1 | 1 1? Ml 1 1 If 4 

1 8 1 1 1 I 1,11 If? fill 

1 1 if i i i i l.i uis>o IU a |li] 











z3- "■'■■■• 



Z z 
BO 



Page 4 of 4 



3$B 



"3 ; '•' 



-r 
I'.'f '" 



s £ 

.5 , - 



J.S'i 



-jzL 



93 



Atta chmen t V 
¥»,^^fe. *^ san Francisco public Utilities commission 




Water 

hetch hetchy 
Water & power 

clean water 



SS m»»«ct ! 



kOOX. San Franciscd. CA 0-S1Q3 - TCt. (rtl 3> 114-0740. f«.x 141 SI S5<-HCIO 




MEMORANDUM 



GAVIN NEWS0M 
MAYOR 



E. DENNIS NORMANDY 
PRESIDENT 



ROBERT J. COSTELL0 

VICE PRESIDENT 



ANN MOLLER CAEN 
ADAM WERE ACH 
RYAN L. BROOKS 



PATRICIA E. MARTEL 

GENERAL MANAGER 



HARLAN L. KELLY, JR. 
ASSISTANT GENERAL 
MANAGER. 

INFRASTRUCTURE 



TO: 



FROM: 



Leanne Nhan 
Budget Analyst 




fi 



tests 

Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. 



DATE: 



SUBJECT: 



March 18,2004 



Space Justification, 
1145 & 1155 Market 



In a memo to you regarding the proposed office space increase, the CLP group 
generally described the need for additional space to accommodate the anticipated 
increase in CLP staff. Subsequently, you requested explanation as to whether or not 
there will be periods of unoccupied space at either 1 145 Market or 1 155 Market 
during the term of the lease. 

There are currently 300 work spaces on the 3 s1 , 6'\ 7 th and 9 ,h floors at 1 155 Market, 
occupied by 274 CLP employees and 26 SFPUC employees not directly working for 
the CLP. There will be approximately 1 15 CTP staff persons in the administrative and 
program development and support divisions of the CLP relocating to 1 145 Market, 
where there will be an estimated 1 1 5 available CLP work spaces. As soon as this 
supplemental request is approved and leasehold improvements are completed, which 
is expected by May 2004, the CIP group anticipates full occupancy of the 1 15 work 
spaces at 1 145 Market, with no unoccupied spaces. 

The technical divisions of the CLP (engineering, construction management and 
project management) are expected to remain at 1 155 Market. Concurrent with the 
move to 1 145 Market, work will be done to increase and reconfigure the current 
cubicle spaces at 1155 Market to provide an estimated 240 work spaces (as estimated 
by DPW's Bureau of Architecture in the proposal dated January 5, 2004). By June 
2004, SFPUC anticipates that of the 240 workspaces, 175 CLP staff persons, 30 
consultants/students and the 26 SFPUC employees not directly working on the CLP 
will occupy 231 work spaces at 1 155 Market. Therefore, the CIP group anticipates 
approximately 9 unoccupied work spaces at 1 155 Market. However, as the 
remaining 43 vacant engineering positions are filled over the next 12 months, there 
will be full occupancy by June 2005 of the 240 spaces at 1 155 Market. It is expected 
that as the 43 vacant positions arc filled, consultants/intems will be required to share 
cubicles/offices. 

The SFPUC critically needs space adjaceni to 1155 Market Street for CIP staff. Space is 
available now at 1 145 Market Street. According to the SFPUC Real Estate Division, if the 
SFPUC does not proceed with a lease for the entire space requirement, it will jeopardize its 
ability to lease the space it requires. 

Please contact me if you need additional information. Thank you. 

94 



.Vrr. :.:;;.-•%---!•:. 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 6 - File 03-1640 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance and Audits Committee at its 
meeting of March 10, 2004 



Department: 
Item: 



Location: 

Lessor: 

Concession 
Agreements: 



Lease Agreements: 



) 



Airport Commission 

Resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the (a) 
existing Concession Agreements and separate Lease 
Agreements for Rental Car Operations between the City 
and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airport Commission and Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis 
Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, 
Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A- 
Car Company of San Francisco, The Hertz Corporation, 
and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc.; and (b) existing 
Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations between the 
City and County of San Francisco acting by and through 
its Airport Commission and National Car Rental 
Systems, Inc 1 . 

The Rental Car Center north of the North Terminal at 
the San Francisco International Airport. 

City and County of San Francisco by and through the 
Airport Commission. 

The Board of Supervisors previously approved (File No. 
98-411) Concession Agreements between the Airport and 
seven rental car companies including Alamo, Avis, 
Budget, Dollar, Enterprise, Hertz, and Thrifty, for the 
five-year period from December 30, 1998 through 
December 29, 2003 and extended by the Airport, as 
provided for under the original Concession Agreements, 
for one five-year period from December 30, 2003 to 
December 29, 2008. The Concession Agreement between 
the Airport and National, as previously approved by the 
Board of Supervisors (File No. 98-411) for the same five- 
year period from December 30, 1998 through December 
29, 2003 was terminated in November of 2002 (see 
Comment No. 1). 

In addition to the Concession Agreements, the Board of 
Supervisors previously approved (File No. 98-411) Lease 
Agreements between the Airport and eight rental car 



1 ANC is the parent company of both Alamo Rent-a-Car and National Car Rental Systems, Inc. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

95 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Number of Square 
Feet: 



Term of Concession 
Agreements and 
Lease Agreements: 



Right of Renewal: 

Purpose of 
Amendment No. 1: 



companies including Alamo, Avis, Budget, Dollar, 
Enterprise, Hertz, National, and Thrifty, for the five-year 
period from December 30, 1998 through December 29, 
2003 and extended by the Airport, as provided for under 
the original Lease Agreements, for one five-year period 
from December 30, 2003 to December 29, 2008. 

According to Mr. David Dunn of the Airport, the 
Concession Agreements pertain to the Concession Fees 
which are paid by the rental car companies to the Airport, 
based on the higher of the Minimum Annual Guarantee 
or the percentage of gross revenues (see below), while the 
Lease Agreements pertain to rents paid by the rental car 
companies to the Airport for the space occupied by each 
rental car company at the Airport's Rental Car Center. 

As shown in Attachment I, provided by the Airport, the 
Lease Agreements provide for a total of 2,036,122 square 
feet. The Rental Car Center includes a five-story rental 
car garage, which accommodates 3,600 vehicles, a Quick 
Turnaround Area (QTA) where returned rental vehicles 
are cleaned and refueled (with a capacity for an 
additional 1,400 vehicles), and a surface storage area. 



The Airport has exercised, effective December 30, 2003, 
its five-year option to extend the term under the 
provisions of the existing five-year Concession 
Agreements and separate Lease Agreements, effective 
from December 30, 2003 through December 29, 2008, 
after the initial five-year term of the Concession 
Agreements and Lease Agreements expired on December 
29, 2003. 

None. 



The proposed Amendment No. 1 to the existing 
Concession Agreements and to the separate Lease 
Agreements, for the five-year period retroactive to 
December 30, 2003 through December 29, 2008, would (a) 
incorporate the requirements of the City's Minimum 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

96 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Compensation Ordinance and Health Care Accountability 
Ordinance (MCO/HCAO), Ob) reduce by ten percent the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) under the 
Concession Agreements payable by the rental car 
companies to the Airport, (c) waive an increase in rent, 
under the Lease Agreements, payable by the rental car 
companies to the Airport (see Annual Rent Payable to the 
Airport below) and (d) adjust the threshold for abatement 
of the requirement to pay to the Airport the MAG during 
months of reduced deplaning passengers at the Airport, 
as further explained below. 



Annual Concession 
Fees Payable to the 
Airport by the 
Rental Car Companies 
Under the Existing 
Concession 

Agreements and Under 
the Proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to 
the Concession 
Agreements: 



As shown in Attachment I, provided by the Airport, under 
the existing Concession Agreements each of the rental car 
companies pays to the Airport an annual Concession Fee 
equal to the higher of either (a) ten percent of its annual 
gross revenues, or (b) a Minimum Annual Guarantee 
(MAG). 

As shown in Attachment I, the proposed Amendment No. 
1 to the Concession Agreements would reduce the MAG 
for each of the rental car companies by ten percent, or a 
total reduction of $2,254,700 from $22,546,998 to 
$20,292,298. 



Amendment No. 1 would also change the "MAG 
abatement" provision of the Concession Agreements, 
which provides MAG relief to the rental car companies. 
Under the existing Concession Agreements, during any 
month in which the number of deplaning passengers at 
the Airport is less than 75 percent of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996, the 
MAG is abated, and for that month, the rental car 
companies would pay a Concession Fee equal to 10 
percent of revenues regardless of whether that amount is 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

97 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Annual Rent Payable 
to the Airport 
By the Rental Car 
Companies Under 
the Exiting Lease 
Agreements and 
Under the Proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to 
the Lease Agreements 



more than or less than the MAG. Amendment No. 1 
would change this provision so that during any month in 
which the number of deplaning passengers at the Airport 
is less than 70 percent, instead of 75 percent, of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996, the 
MAG would be abated and for that month the rental car 
companies would pay a Concession Fee equal to ten 
percent of revenues. Attachment III, provided by the 
Airport, states that "[i]f this percentage [70 percent] were 
in place today, the savings to the City in MAG 
abatements for calendar year 2003 alone would have been 
$1,121,231," meaning the Airport would have realized 
increased Concession revenues of $1,121,231, than if the 
threshold were 75 percent. 

Attachment I, provided by the Airport, contains the 
annual rent payable by the rental car companies to the 
Airport for each rental car company under the existing 
Lease Agreements. According to Mr. Dunn, the 
"Structure Fee" in Attachment I is the rent paid by the 
rental car companies to the Airport for space within the 
building structure of the Rental Car Center, while the 
"Surface Fee" is the rent paid by the rental car companies 
to the Airport for space in the outside storage area of the 
Rental Car Center. 



Under the original Lease Agreements the rents payable to 
the Airport were to be increased at the start of the five- 
year extension term based on the current market value of 
unimproved land in the vicinity of the Airport. Based on 
this provision of the original Lease Agreements, the 
annual rents would have increased by 4.2 percent 
effective December 30, 2003. However, under the 
proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreements, the 
4.2 percent rent increase during the five-year extension 
term would be waived. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

98 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



According to Mr. Dunn, the reason for granting the rental 
car companies both a ten percent reduction in the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee (under the Concession 
Agreements) and a waiver of the 4.2 percent rent increase 
(under the Lease Agreements) is that this "would help to 
offset the costs incurred by complying with [the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance]." 

As shown in the table below, if the scheduled 4.2 percent 
rent increase is waived, the rental car companies would 
not have to pay the Airport an additional $489,355 in rent 
($12,043,390 less $11,554,035). 





Existing 

Rent 
(Annual) 


Rent After 
Increase 
(Annual) 


Rent Under 

Amendment 

No. 1 

(Annual) 


Alamo 

(ANC) 


$1,867,136 


$1,946,244 


$1,867,136 


National 

(ANC) 


1,335,595 


1,392,173 


1,335,595 


Avis 


2,308,141 


2,405,911 


2,308,141 


Budget 


897,833 


935,852 


897,833 


Dollar 


858,703 


895,077 


858,703 


Enterprise 


291,564 


303,921 


291,564 


Hertz 


3,672,007 


3,827,486 


3,672,007 


Thriftv 


323,056 


336,727 


323,056 


Total 


$11,554,035 


$12,043,390 


$11,554,035 



Attachment II, provided by the Airport, shows the gross 
revenues realized by each of the eight rental car 
companies as well as the details of the rents paid by the 
rental car companies to the Airport for the past five years. 
As shown in Attachment II, during the initial five-year 
term from December 30, 1998 through August of 2003, 
the rental car companies have paid to the Airport 
$136,712,785 in Concession Fees and $57,770,160 in rent, 
or a total of $194,482,945. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

99 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Utilities and 

Janitorial 

Services: 



Minimum 
Compensation 
Ordinance (MCO)/ 
Health Care 
Accountability 
Ordinance (HCAO) 
Requirement: 



As explained by the Airport in Attachment IV, the rental 
car companies pay for the utilities and janitorial services 
at the Rental Car Center, except for janitorial services in 
the public lobby and public restrooms, which are provided 
by the Airport. 



The existing Concession Agreements and Lease 
Agreements with the seven rental car companies, and the 
Lease Agreement with National Rent-A-Car, do not 
require the rental car companies to comply with the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and the Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance (MCO/HCAO), since these 
Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements were 
entered into prior to the adoption by the Board of 
Supervisors of those two ordinances. The proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and 
Lease Agreements would require the rental car 
companies to comply with the MCO/HCAO ordinances 
during the five-year extension period of these 
Agreements, from December 30, 2003 through December 
29, 2008. 



Ms. Cathy Widener of the Airport provided the 
memorandum shown as Attachment V to this report, 
which contains information provided by the Office of 
Contract Administration as to the requirements of the 
MCO/HCAO ordinances. 

As stated in Attachment IV, provided by the Airport, 
"[t]he Industry [i.e. the Rental Car Companies] 
unanimously agreed to comply with both ordinance [s] if 
the Airport 1) would keep the land portion of the rental 
rates at the current rates, and 2) reduce the current 
Minimum Annual Guarantees (MAGs) for each company 
by 10%. " 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

100 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Comments: 1. As previously noted, the proposed Amendment No. 1 

to the Concession Agreements would reduce the Minimum 
Annual Guarantee payable to the Airport by each of the 
rental car companies by ten percent or a total of 
$2,254,700 in reduced revenues to the Airport. Also as 
previously noted, the rent increase that would be waived 
by the Airport under the proposed Amendment No. 1 to 
the Lease Agreements totals $489,355. Considering both 
of these two revenue reductions, the Airport reports in 
Attachment IV that "[o]ver the five-year period, this 
would reduce the MAGs by $11,273,500 and it would 
reduce the land rent by $2,445,000," resulting in reduced 
payments being made by the rental car companies to the 
Airport. The Budget Analyst notes that the actual rent 
increase that would be waived under the proposed 
Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreements over the five 
years is $2,446,775 ($489,355 times five) and not 
$2,445,000. Therefore, if this proposed resolution is 
approved, the total reduced payments to be made by the 
rental car companies to the Airport, over the five-year 
extension period retroactive to December 30, 2003 
through December 29, 2008, is $13,720,275 ($11,273,500 
plus $2,446,775). That amount of $13,720,275 would 
result in the Airport making reduced Annual Service 
Payments (15 percent of Concession revenues) to the 
City's General Fund by a total of $2,058,041, over the 
five-year period from December 30, 2003 through 
December 29, 2008, or an estimated General Fund 
revenue decrease of $411,608 annually over the five 
years. However, the $13,720,275 in reduced payments by 
the rental car companies to the Airport is based solely on 
the reduced MAG and waived rent increase. The 
adjustment to the "MAG abatement" threshold could 
partially offset that revenue reduction if it is applicable in 
a given year, which in calendar year 2003 would have 
produced $1,121,231 in additional revenue for the Airport, 
including $168,185 for the City's General Fund. 

2. As stated in Attachment VI, provided by the Airport, 
"[a]t the time the agreements were awarded, the City's 
Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance ('MCO/HCAO') did not exist. 
The City Attorney's Office has advised staff that, as a 
legal matter, the MCO/HCAO do not apply to the 
Airport's mere exercise of the option to extend the term, 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

101 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



unless the agreements are actually being amended or 
modified." Under the proposed Amendment No. 1, the 
Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements would 
incorporate the MCO/HCAO requirements, with which 
the rental car companies would be required to comply 
during the five-year option period (from December 30, 
2003 through December 29, 2008). As noted in 
Attachment IV, provided by Mr. Dunn, based on data 
submitted by the rental car companies to the Airport, the 
rental car companies reported that their costs to comply 
with the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and 
Health Care Accountability Ordinance would be between 
$14.5 million and $16.5 milhon, over the five-year option 
period, or between $2.9 million to $3.3 million annually. 

The Budget Analyst previously reported to the Finance 
and Audits Committee, at its meeting of March 10, 2004, 
that the Airport had not prepared any written analysis as 
to the reasonableness or accuracy pertaining to the 
estimated reported costs of between approximately $14.5 
million and $16.5 million, which, according to the rental 
car companies, would be incurred by the rental car 
companies in order to comply with the City's Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance and the Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance. Therefore the Airport had not 
verified the cost estimates as reported by the rental car 
companies. Subsequently, on March 15, 2004, Mr. Pfeiffer 
and Mr. Dunn of the Airport reported the Airport's own 
estimate of the costs to be incurred by the rental car 
companies in order to comply with the City's Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance and the Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance. This estimate as reported by 
the Airport was $2,459,054 annually. However, Mr. 
Pfeiffer and Mr. Dunn explained that the Airport's 
$2,459,054 annual estimate of the costs to be incurred by 
the rental car companies to comply with the two City 
ordinances was based on unverified data submitted by the 
rental car companies, including a survey made by the 
rental car companies as to the number of positions and 
the hourly rates of pay for lower-paid employees, most of 
whom work part time, and who do not receive wages and 
benefits in compliance with the City's Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance and the Health Care 
Accountability Ordinance. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Mr. Pfeiffer has acknowledged to the Budget Analyst that 
the Airport: (a) has not verified either the rental car 
companies' number of employees or their actual wage 
rates; (b) has not verified whether or not such employees 
receive any health coverage; and, (c) has assumed that 
such employees work on average 1,040 hours annually, or 
approximately one-half time. 

3. Unlike various other lease and concession agreements 
which provided rental relief, as previously approved by 
the Board of Supervisors and which were approved by the 
Board of Supervisors based on requests of the Airport 
lessees that the lessees needed rental relief because of 
9/11, SARS, the war in Iraq and the resulting decrease in 
airline passenger trattic, tins proposed, request uy Li±e 
rental car companies is simply to obtain a rental 
reduction to compensate the rental car companies for the 
costs incurred if these companies were to comply with the 
City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health 
Care Accountability Ordinance. As previously noted, the 
rental car companies were not required to comply with 
the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health 
Care Accountability Ordinance because their Concession 
and Lease Agreements were entered into prior to the 
adoption of these two ordinances by the Board of 
Supervisors. 

Recommendation: The Budget Analyst recognizes that it is a Board of 

Supervisors policy decision as to whether the rental car 
companies should now be required to implement the 
City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and Health 
Care Accountability Ordinance and to be paid for such 
compliance. However, in the professional judgment of the 
Budget Analyst, the Airport should first provide the 
necessary verified financial data to the Board of 
Supervisors. 

Given the fact that the Airport has acknowledged that it 
has not independently verified the reported costs which 
the rental car companies would incur by complying with 
the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance and the 
Health Care Accountability Ordinance, disapprove the 
proposed resolution, which would reduce the Concession 
Fees and rents payable by the rental car companies to the 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST! 03 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Airport, by up to $13,720,275, retroactive from December 
30, 2003 through December 29, 2008. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 104 



November 25, 2003 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, C A 94102 



Ssn Francisco International Airport 

Atta c hment I 



Page 1 of P A BoxS057 

Ssn Francisco, CA 94 
Tel 650.821. 5O0Q 
Fas 650.821 .5005 
www.flvsfo.com 



Subject: Amendment #1 - Rental Car Lease Agreements and Concession Agreements 
Background 

Dear Mr. Rose: 



3WN, JS. 
WAYGR 



The Airport Commission on March 3, 1997 awarded the agreements for rental car operations 
at the Airport. The term of each agreement was for five years, commcnoJiLg with the- 
opening of the Rental Car Center, with one five-year option exercisable under the same 
terms and conditions at the sole discretion of the Airport Co mmi ssion. The Rental Car 
Center opened for business on December 30, 1998. Therefore, the first five-year term is due 
to expire on December 29, 2003, at 11:59 PM. The second five-year term will commence 
December 30, 2003 and expire December 29, 2008, at 11:59 PM. 

The on- Airport Rental Car Companies operate at the Airport under two agreements: 1) the 
Lease Agreement and 2) the Concession Agreement. The Lease Agreement pertains to the 
space occupied by each company at the Rental Car Center. The Concession Agreement 
pertains to the Concession Fee paid to the Airport. This fee is based on a Company's gross 
revenues. Each company pays either a Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) or ten-percent 
(10%) of gross revenues, whichever is greater. The original MAG was determined for each 
company by its original bid. The highest bidder had the opportunity to select its counter and 
ready stall locations. The space allocated to each company is based on Market Share. 

Attachment -1 reflects the current space occupied bv each company and the annual rent paid 
for the space. It also shows the current rental rate versus a new rental rate reflecting the 
increase in the unimproved land portion of the facility. This increase will not occur, but will 
instead seiwe to help offset the costs incurred by the rental car companies to pay for 
additional benefits required by MCO/HCAO. (See attached.) 

The current M ini mum Annual Guarantee (MAG) for each company is listed in the table 
below: 





Current MAG 


10% Reduction 


ANC (Original Alamo MAG) 


53,751,000 


5375,100 


Avis 


5,818,000 


581,800 


Budget 


2.076.240 


207,624 


Dollar 


1,650,000 


165,000 


Enterprise 


501.641 


50,164 


Hertz 


8,122.900 


812,290 


Thrifty 


627,217 


62,722 


TOTAL 


S22 ? 546,99S 


S2.254.700 



ror 



Attachment I 




Page 2 of 3 






4 



Mr. Harvey Ross 
November 25, 2003 
Pase2 



The current facility is approximately 2,117,380 square feet. The rental car facility has the 
capacity for 3,600 parked vehicles. The Quick Turn Around area (QTA) has the capacityfor 
an additional 1,400 vehicles. 

As aresult of the 10% MAG reduction, the Airport could collect $11,273,500 less for the 
five-year option period. However, once passenger traffic returns to the 1999-2000 levels, 
the rental car companies will be paying 10% of gross revenues, which could be greater than 
the MAG. The MAG is recalculated annually. MAGs can go up or down, based on a 
company's gross revenues, but they can never drop below the original bid. The current 
MAGs represent the original bids for all the companies, except Enterprise and Thrifty. 

Sincerely, 



David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Properly Manager 

Revenue Development 

Attachment 

cc: David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



106 



Rental Car Facility Rent Comparison 

Attachment I 



STRUCTURE FEE 



Page 3 of 3 







Original 


New 


Company 


Square 
Feet 


$B.O0 
per square foot 


$8.34 
per square foot 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


210,173 


$1,681,384.00 


$1,752,842.82 


149,512 


$1,196,096.00 


$1,246,930.08 


Avis 


257,672 


$2,061,376.00 


$2,148,984.48 


BliuySi 


99,155 


$793,240.00 


$826,952.70 


Dollar 


95,971 


$767,768.00 


$800,398.14 


Enterprise 


33,221 


$265,768.00 


$277,063.14 


Hertz 


404,079 


$3,232,632.00 


$3,370,018.86 


Thrifty 


34,761 


$278,088.00 


$289,906.74 




(TOTAL 


1,284,544 


$10,276,352.00 


$10,713,096.96 



Difference 



$71,458.82 



$50,834.08 



$87,608.48 



$33,712.70 



$32,630.14 



$11,295.14 



$137,386.86 



$11,818.74 



$436,744.96 



~£?3*" ; :™~j ■*■"■? i;':V ': .' 




SURFACE 


FEE 




Orlsinal 


New 


Company 


Feet 


$1.70 
per square foot 


$1.77 
per square foot 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


109,266 


$185,752.20 


$193,400.82 


82,058 


$139,498.60 


$145,242.66 


Avis 


145,156 


$246,765.20 


$256,926.12 


Budget 


61,525 


$104,592.50 


$108,899.25 


Dollar 


53,491 


$90,934.70 


$94,679.07 


Enterprise 


15,174 


$25,795.80 


$26,857.98 


Hertz 


258,456 


$439,375.20 


$457,467.12 


Thrifty 


26,452 


$44,968.40 


$46,820.04 



TOTAL 751,578 $1 ,277,682.60| $1,330,293.06 



Difference 



$7,648.62 



$5,744.06 



$10,160.92 



$4,306.75 



$3,744.37 



$1,062.18 



$18,091.92 



$1,851.64 



$52,610.46 



STRUCTURE AND SURFACE FEES COMBINED 





Total 
Square Feet 


Total Original 
Fee Schedule 


Total New 
Fee Schedule 


ANC (Alamo) 
(National) 


319,439 


$1,867,136.20 


$1,946,243.64 


231,570 


$1,335,594.60 


$1,392,172.74 


Avis 


402,828 


$2,308,141.20 


$2,405,910.60 


Budget 


160,680 


$897,832.50 


$935,851.95 


Dollar 


149,462 


$858,702.70 


$895,077.21 


Enterprise 


48,395 


$291,563.80 


$303,921.12 


Hertz 


662,535 


$3,672,007.20 


$3,827,485.98 


Thrifty 


61,213 


$323,056.40 


$336,726.78 










TOTAL 


2,036,122 


$11,554,034.60 


$12,043,390.02 



Difference 



$79,107.44 



¥55,570.14 



$97,769.40 



$38,019.45 



$36,374.51 



$12,357.32 



$155,478.78 



$13,670.38 



$489,355.42 



107 



X:\CDM\WRKFILES\DDUNNJ\RCC\Rent Comparison.xls.xls - Sheet2 




November 5, 2003 



San Francisco Irvternstions! Airport 

Attachment I I 

Page 1 of 2 

P.O. Box 8097 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

T=l 550.821.5000 

Fax 650.821.5005 

www.flysfo.com 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
1390 Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

Subj ect: Amendment #1 - Five-Year Gross Revenues and Rents 



A1SPSRT 

coaaiiEsioN Dear Mr. Rose: 

CITY AND COUNTY 
OF SAN FRANCISCO 



L. SP.OWM.JR. 
MAYOR 



LARRY MAZZOLA 

iR-ZIDENT 



MICHAELS. STRUMS ICY 
VICE PRES1DEHT 



LINDA S.CRAYTOH 



ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L.MARTIN 
AIRPORT DIRECTOR 



Attached for your review is a list of the rental car companies located at the facility at the 
Airport, hsting the monthly gross revenues and rent per company for the past five years. 
Please note that the information for 2003 is only available through August 2003. 

You will also notice that the revenues for National ceased in November 2002. ANC, the 
parent company for both the Alamo and National brands, filed Chapter 11 under 
bankruptcy protection in November 2001. Under this mling the Court has the authority to 
allow the company in bankruptcy to assume or reject any or all or its agreements without 
the consent of the Airport. ANC chose to assume the Alamo Concession Agreement, which 
happened to be the greater of the two MAG amounts, and reject the National Concession 
Agreement. The ruling went into effect in November 2002. The gross revenues for both 
brands are reported by ANC under the original Alamo Concession Agreement. The result 
of ANC assu min g both leases resulted in no facility rent loss by the Airport. 

Sincerely, 

David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Property Manager 

Revenue Development 

Attachment 



cc: 



David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



108 



FIVE YEAR GROSS REVENUES/RENT 



Attachment 1 1 



^(TlhtlO'ANiY-. 




-jgcg l" 




2D00 




: 2001; , : | 

28,210,751 
3,942,370 
1,867,136 




Pa 


ge 


2 of 2 


S 
$ 
$ 


■TOTAL ;|; 

155,214,412 

19,389,383 

9,335,680.00 


>wiVEt v-a\ I : J 

->. MO 

3ROSS REV 
XDNCESSION FEE 
: AC1UTY RENT 


$ 
$ 


40,301,986 
4,411,879 
1,857,136 




41,132,097 
4,570,341 
1,867,136 


•-• uy - f 

21,784,761 

3,669,097 
1,867,136 


$ 
$ 


23,734,817 

. 2,795,696 

1,867,136 


WIS 

CROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
-ACILITYRENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


63,125,917 

6,613,240 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 


67,862,021 
6,995,156 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 
$ 


45,208,609 
5,B7B,779 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 


43,018,038 
5,877,571 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 


25,678,924 
3,891,444 
2,308,141 


$ 
$ 

$ 


244,893,509 
29,256,190 
11,540,705 


3UDGET 
3ROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


27,495,174 

2,767,200 

897,832 


$ 
$ 

$ 


32,897,443 

3,296,660 

897,832 


$ 
$ 


23,775,307 

2,892,014 

897,832 




19,228,024 

2,447,420 

897,832 


$ 
$ 
$ 


12,684,573 

1,505,123 
897,832 


$ 
$ 
$ 


116,080,521 

12,908,417 

4,489,160 


DOLLAR 

3ROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 

$ 


22,753,881 

2,419,527 

858,702 


s 


22,856,891 

2,425,137 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


15,501,543 

2,013,850 

858,702 




15,176,148 

i,B76,610 

858,702 


$ 
$ 


9,434,853 

1,"i9a,us3 

858,702 


$ 
$ 
$ 


85,723,31 6 

9,031,187 
4,293,51 


ENTERPRISE 
GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


5,406,453 
553,252 
291,564 




6,103,654 
610,366 
291,564 


$ 
$ 


6,090,298 
627,417 
291,564 


$ 
5 


5,901,667 
602,817 
291,564 


$ 
$ 

$ 


3,739,206 
402,247 
291,564 


$ 
$ 


27,241,278 

2,796,099 
1,457,820 


HERTZ 

)SS REV 
i. .IcESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


s 


100,785,221 

10,104,996 

3,672,007 


$ 


112,611,142 

11,261,113 

3,672,007 




83,225,155 
9,769,012 
3,572,007 


$ 
$ 


75,661,900 
8,732,226 
3,672,007 


$ 
$ 
$ 


46,197,995 
5,579,543 
3,672,007 


$ 


419,482,413 

45,446,890 


NATIONAL 
GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 


34,627,987 
3,483,672 
1,335,594 


$ 
$ 


32,906,892 
3,407,051 

1,335,594 


$ 
$ 


24,049,066 
2,876,738 
1,335,594 




15,462,887 
2,365,085 
1,335,594 


$ 
$ 
$ 


1,335,594 


$ 
$ 
$ 


107,046,832 

12,132,546 

6,677,970 


THRIFTY 
GROSS REV 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 


7,261,244 
731,820 
323,056 


$ 

$ 


8,010,235 
809,765 
323,055 




6,355,427 
380,185 
323,056 


$ 
$ 


7,379,031 
759,076 
323,056 


$ 
$ 


5,077,764 
535,632 
323,056 


$ 
$ 
$ 


34,083,701 
3,516,479 
1,615,280 


1 U"l AL 

GROSS REV . 
CONCESSION FEE 
FACILITY RENT 


$ 
$ 
$ 


301,758,863 
31,085,585 
11,554,032 




324,380,375 
34,711,183 
11,554,032 


S 


232,416,155 
28,580,355 
11,554,032 




204,612,456 
26,329,902 
11,554,032 




174,157,766 
15,905,748 
11,554,032 


$1,237,3:5,616 
$ 136,712,785 
$ 57,770,150 



i he revenues and rent for 2003 is only through August 2003 

National's MAG was rejected in November 2002. National revenues are included in Alamo 



109 



X:\CDM\WP.KFILES\DDUNN\Five-yr Rsv Analysis.xls.xls 



Print Date: 11/3/20C3 




November 13. 2003 



Mr. Harvey Rose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
City & County of San Francisco 
1390 Market Street, Room 1025 
San Francisco, CA 94102 



san Francisco International Airport 

Atta chmen t III 

P.O. Box S097 

San Francisco, CA 94128 

Tel £50.821.5000 

Fax550.S21.5005 

www.flysfo.com 



i 



SUBJECT: 



Amendment #1 -Rental Car Leases/Agreements- MAG Abatement 



AIRPORT 
COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY 
OF SAN FRANCISCO 

WILLIE L.BROWN, JR. 
MAYOR 

LARRY MAZIOLA 
PRESIDENT 

MICHAELS. STRUNSKY 
VICE PRESIDENT 

LINDA S.CRAYTON 

CARYL ITO 

ELEANOR JOHNS 



JOHN L MARTIN 
AIRPORT DIRECTOR 



Dear Mr. Rose: 

As part of Amendment #1 of the Leases and Agreements, the rental car companies have 
agreed to a modification to the MAG adjustment mechanism. The Concession 
Agreements currently pro vide that the MAGs are abated whenever the number of 
deplaning passengers during the month is less than 75% of deplaning passengers for the 
same calendar month in the base year, which is 1996. Since the September 1 1 th disaster, 
the MAGs have been abated ten times given the reduction in passengers. Staff has 
negotiated that this provision be amended to provide that the MAGs be abated when the 
number of deplaning passengers during the month is less than 70% of the number of 
deplaning passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. Only five out of the ten 
times the MAGs have been abated did the number of deplaning passengers drop below 
70% of the same calendar month in 1996. If this percentage were in place today, the 
savings to the City in MAG abatements for calendar year 2003 alone would have been 
$1,121,231. 

Approval of Amendment #1 to the rental car leases and agreements is critical to avoid 
such MAG abatements in the future. 

Sincerely, 



Ucu/kt iL (LI 



David I. Dunn 

Senior Principal Property Manager 

cc: Leo Fermin 

David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



110 




November IS, 2003 



Mr. Harvey Psose 
Office of the Budget Analyst 
City & County of San Francisco 
1390 Market Street, Room 1025 
San Francisco, C A 94102 



San Francisco International Airport 

Attachment IV 



Page 1 



of 2 

P.O. hot 8097 

San FranciscD, CA 94US 

Tel SSO.S21.SO00 

FoJt550.S21.S00S 

www.flysfo.com 



SUBJECT: 



Amendment #1 - Rental Car Leas es/Asreements- Additional Information 



AIRPOBt 

COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY 

Of SAN FRANCISCO 

WILLIE L. BROWN. JR. 
MJSVCR 

LARRT MAIIOLA 
Btt. c .SID£NT 

MICHAEL S.STRUNSKY 
VICfPR£5/0E'Nr 

LINDA S. CRAYTON 



JOHN L. MARTIN 
UftPOtTDIRf.C'OP. 



Dear Mr. Rose: 

As I previously stated in a letter dated October 31, 2003, Airport staff met with rental car 
industry representatives from the seven companies on several occasions prior to exercising 
the final Five-Year Option in order to get their agreement to comply with the Minimum 
Compensation Ordinance (MCO) and the Health Care Accountability Ordinance (HCAO). 
The Industry unanimously agreed to comply with both ordinance if the Airport 1) would 
keep the land portion of the rental rates at the current rates, and 2) reduce the current 
Minimum Annual Guarantees (MAGs) for each company by 10%. Under the current 
agreement,, the City could adjust the land value portion, of the rental rates to reflect the 
then-current market value of unimproved land in the vicinity of the Airport. Staff 
calculated the collective increase to be approximately $489,000. The combination of these 
two items would assist the rental car companies in, offsetting costs incurred by the 
compliance of the Ordinances. 



ELEANOR JOHNS _ 



The annual cost estimate to comply with MCO/HCAO received from each company is 
listed in the table below: 



ANC 1 


Between $263,000 and $424,000 


Avis" 


Between $440,000 and $500,000 


Budget 


See Avis 


Dollar 


5213,000 


Enterprise 


Between $78,000 and SS5.000 


Hertz 


S2.1 million 


Thrifty 


See Dollar 


TOTAL 


Between $2.9 million and S3. 3 million 



1 Original Alamo MAG 

2 Combined with Budget because both companies are owned by Cendant 
: Combined with Thrifty undn 1 the DTAG Group 



111 



Attachment IV 
Page 2 of 2 

Mr. Harvey Rose 
November 18, 2003 
Page 2 



The costs listed above are only estimates. The actual costs will riot be determined until 
after the first year of compliance. 

In a previous letter dated November 12, 2003, 1 surnmarized the 10% reduction in current 
MAGs to be 52.254,700. This, accompanied with no increase to land rent equals 
approximately 52,743.700 annually, which would help to offset the costs incurred by 
complying with MCO/HCAO. Over the five-year option period, this would reduce the 
MAGs by 51 1,273,500 and it would reduce the land rent by 52,445,000. However, all 
companies would comply fully with MCO/HCAO. The cost incurred by the rental car 
companies for this compliance over the same five- year period is approximately 514.5 
million and 516.5 million. 

The rental car companies pay for all the utilities they use at the Facility. They are also 
responsible for all janitorial costs related to their tenant leasehold space. As is standard 
practice in all Airport Terminal areas, the Airport custodians clean, the public lobby area 
and the public restrooms. 



Sincerely, 



JLjLX^- 



David I. Dunn 

Sr. Principal Property Manager 

Revenue Development 

cc: Leo Fermin 

David Pfeiffer 
Peter Nardoza 



112 




Attachment V 

To: Budget Analysts Office s 

Fr: Cathy Widener, SFO Governmental Affairs 
RE: Concession and Lease Agreements for Rental Car Operations 
MCO/HCAO Requirements 



Per you request for information regarding the MCO and HCO requirements triggered by the Rental 
Car Center Lease modification, please find information below taken directly from the Office of 
Contract Administration website ( http://www,ci.sf,ca.us/oca/lwlh,htm ). 

The Office of Contract Administration monitors these programs for the City. Please be advised that 
this information shouid not be attributed to me, but to the Office of Contract Administration. 

Minimum Compensation Ordinance (MCO) shall consist of the following: 

Hourly gross compensation in the amount of nine dollars ($9.00) per hour. 

In no less than twelve (12) nor more than eighteen (18) months from the Effective Date, the City 
shall increase the hourly gross compensation to ten dollars ($10.00) per hour; provided, however, 
that in the case of Nonprofit Corporations and public entities, this adjustment shall only be made if 
the Joint Report issued by the Controller, Mayor's Budget Office, and Budget Analyst, pursuant to 
San Francisco Administrative Code Section 3.6 finds that the City has sufficient funds to pay the 
anticipated costs of the adjustment. A finding of "sufficient funds" shall mean that the City will not 
be required to reduce services in order to pay the anticipated costs of the adjustment. 

For each of the next three (3) years after the adjustment provided in Subsection (a)(ii) is made, at 
annual intervals, the City shall make an additional adjustment of 2.5%. 

The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to a written agreement (including, 
without limitation, any lease, concession, franchise or easement agreement) for the 
exclusive use of real property that is owned by the City or of which the City has 
exclusive use, if such property is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Airport 
Commission and the term of the agreement exceeds twenty-nine (29) days in any 
calendar year, whether by single or cumulative instruments. If cumulative 
instruments cause the term of the agreement to exceed twenty-nine (29) days, the 
agreement in question shall be subject to this Article only on and after the effective 
date of the instrument which causes the term to exceed twenty-nine (29) days. The 
requirements of this Chapter shall also apply to (i) any sublease or other agreement 
allowing other parties the exclusive right to occupy or use all or any portion of the 
property covered by the agreement and (ii) any agreement between a tenant or 



113 



Attachment V 
Page 2 of 3 



subtenant and any other person or entity to perform services on the airport property. 
Contractors who have agreements covered by this Section shall comply with the 
requirements of this Chapter insofar as they have "Covered Employees." For 
purposes of this Section, "Covered Employee" shall mean an employee who 
provides at least ten (10) hours of work on the property that is the subject of the 
agreement in a two-week Pay Period, adjusted proportionately if the Pay Period is 
other than two weeks. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section, ail exemptions 
and waivers from the requirements of this Chapter that apply to Contracts shall also 
apply to agreements for the use of airport property described in this Section, except 
for the exemption in Subsection (xvii) relating to property contracts). Except as 
otherwise specifically provided, all requirements of this Chapter, and the monitoring 
and enforcement mechanisms provided in this Chapter, shall apply to agreements 
covered by this Section. 



Health Care Accountability Ordinance (HCAO): 

With respect to each Covered Employee who either resides in San Francisco (regardless of where 
the Covered Employee provides services) or provides services covered by this Chapter in San 
Francisco, each Contracting Party shall do one of the following, at the Contracting Party's option: 

(1) Offer to the Covered Employee health plan benefits that meet minimum f 
standards prepared by the Health Director and approved by the Health 

Commission. The minimum standards shall provide for a maximum period for each 
Covered Employee's health benefits to become effective, not to exceed 30 days 
from the start of employment on a covered Contract, Subcontract, Lease or 
Sublease. The Health Commission shall review such standards every two years to 
ensure that the standards stay current with State and Federal regulations and 
existing health benefits practices; or 

(2) For each Week in which the Covered Employee works the applicable minimum 
number of hours set forth in Section 120.2.9(a) (definition of "Covered Employee"), 
pay to the City $1 .50 per hour for each hour the Covered Employee is employed by 
the Contracting Party on the Contract or Subcontract or on property covered by a 
Lease, but not to exceed $60 in any Week. The City shall appropriate money 
received pursuant to this Subsection (a)(2) for the use of the Department of Public 
Health. The Department of Public Health shall use the monies appropriated for 
staffing and other resources to provide medical care for the uninsured. The Heaith 
Commission may increase this hourly rate and Weekly maximum in accordance 
with the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Medical Care in the 
San Francisco Bay Area or such other factors as the Health Commission finds 

appropriate; provided, however, the Health Commission shall take this action no V 

more than once a year and any adjustments in such hourly rate or Weekly 

114 



Attachment V 
Page 3 of 3 
maximum must be approved by the Board of Supervisors by resolution; or 

(3) Participate in a health benefits program developed by the Health Director in 
consultation with the Agency. The Health Director shall obtain Health Commission 
approval of the program before implementing it. The Health Director shall seek such 
approval within twelve (12) months after this Chapter is finally approved. Prior to 
implementation of the health benefits program provided in this Subsection (a)(3), 
each Contracting Party shall comply with Subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2), After the 
Health Director implements the program, in addition to the options provided in 
Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2), Contracting Parties may satisfy their obligations 
under this Chapter by complying with the requirements of the health benefits 
program. In developing the program, the Health Director shall (i) attempt to make 
health coverage available for uninsured Covered Employees and, if feasible, other 
uninsured City residents; (ii) use public health facilities to the maximum extent 
practicable; (iii) make the program economically viable; and (iv) provide a 
mechanism for funding which relies, as much as possible, on contributions by 
participating employers and employees. 



115 




ian FrariCiico iruerna'Lioriai Airport 

Atta chme.nt y x 
Page 1 of 3 



MEMORANDUM 



August 14. 2003 



TO: AIRPORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Larry Mazzola; President 
Hon. Michael S. Strunsky, Vice President 
Hon. Linda S. Crayton 
Hon. Caryl Ito 
. Hon. Eleanor Johns 

FROM: Airport Director 

SUBJECT: Rental Car Operations at San Francisco International Airport 

Amendment to Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 
CONCESSION AGREEMENTS AND LEASE AGREEMENTS FOR RENTAL CAR 
OPERATIONS AT SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT | 

Executive Summary 

On May 12. 2003. the Commission exercised the five-year option on the rental car leases, 
which currently do not contain City requirements regarding the Minimum Compensation 
Ordinance and Health Care Accountability Ordinance ("MCO/HCO"). The attached 
resolutions incorporate MCO/HCO requirements, waive the land rent adjustment, reduce the 
Minimum Annual Guarantee ("MAG") by 10%, and adjust the MAG abatement trigger. 

Background 

By Resolution Nos. 97-0052 through Resolution Nos. 97-0059, the Commission awarded 
eight (8) Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for Rental Car Operations at the 
San Francisco International Airport to Alamo, Avis, Budget, Dollar, Enterprise, Hertz, 
National and Thrifty. 1 

Under the Concession Agreements, each of the rental car companies pays to the Airport an 
annual Concession Fee equal to the higher often percent (10%) of its annual gross revenues 
and a Minimum Annual Guarantee. Under the Lease Agreements, the rental car companies 
pay rent based on the value of the land and cost recovery of the facility. The base. term-was 



As part of the Alamo/National bankruptcy, the National Concession Agreement has since been terminated. 



116 THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 



Members, Airport Commission " 

August 14, 2003 
Page 2 



five years, commencing December 30, 199S, and the Commission has one five-year option 
to extend the term, exercisable at the sole discretion of the Commission. The Lease 
Agreements provide that the land value portion of the rent is adjusted to market value if the 
Airport exercises the term extension option. 

By Airport Commission Resolution No. 03-0075, the Commission exercised the Airport's 
option to extend the term of the agreements for an additional five-year period. The option 
period is scheduled to commence December 30, 2003. 

At the time the agreements were awarded, the City's Minimum Compensation Ordinance 
and Health Care Accountability Ordinance ('MCO/HCAO") did nut exist. The City 
Attorney's Office has advised staff that, as a legal matter, the MCO/HCAO do not apply to 
the Airport's mere exercise of the option to extend the term, unless the agreements are 
actually being amended or modified. The City desires to have the rental car companies 
comply with MCO/HCAO, so staff met with the rental car companies to discuss their 
compliance with these ordinances. 

Proposal 

Given the City's desire to require MCO/HCAO compliance, the rental car companies and 
staff have negotiated an amendment to the agreements summarized as follows: 

1) MAG Reduction . To offset the financial costs of compliance with these Ordinances, 
the rental car companies requested a ten -percent (10%) reduction of their current IvlAGs. 
The current Minimum Annual Guarantee (MAG) for each company is listed in the table 
below: 



a vrp* 








3,751,000 


Avis 






S 


5,818,000 


Budset 






S 


2,076,240 


Dollar 






s 


1,650,000 


Enterprise 






s 


501,641 


Hertz 






s 


8,122,900 


Thrifty 






s 


627,217 




TOTAL 


s • 


22.546.998 


*Original Alamo MAG 








No" Adjustment to Lease 


Rent. 


The rental car con 



2) 

rental rates at the Facility remain at the current rental rates. With the MAG reduction and no 
increase to the rental rates, the rental car companies could offset their costs of compliance 
with the Ordinances. 

3) Adjustment to Minimum .Annual Guarantee Abatement Mechanism . The 
Concession Agreements currently provide that the MAGs are abated whenever the number 
of deplaning passengers during the month is less than 75% of the number of deplaning 



Attachment, yf 

Members, Airpan Commission P a 9 e 3 Of 3 

August 14, 2003 
Pase 3 



passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. Since the September 1 1 th disaster, the 
MAGs have been abated nine times given the reduction in passengers. Staff has negotiated 
that this, provision be amended to provide that the MAG be abated when the number of ' 
deplaning passengers during the month is less than 70% of the number of deplaning 
passengers for the same calendar month in 1996. 

4) MCO/HCAO . The rental car companies will comply with the MCO/HCAO. 

Recommendation 

I, therefore, recommend the approval of the Amendment No. 1 to Concession Agreementi 
uilJ Lease Agreements. 




John {_,. Martin 
Airport Director 

Prepared by: Leo Fennin 



118 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 7 - File 03-1960 



Note: This report reflects the Amendment to the Whole adopted by the Finance 
and Audits Committee at its meeting on March 10, 2004. 



Department: 
Item: 



Description: 



Taxi Commission 

Ordinance amending Article 16 of the Police Code by 
adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to restate the full- 
time driving requirement, and to establish administrative 
penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time 
driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi 
Commission's rules and regulations. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code includes a list of 
infractions and the corresponding fine amounts for such 
infractions for violations committed by Taxicab permit 
holders of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. 
According to Mr. Farell Suslow of the Police Department, 
citations for such violations are issued by the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail. According to Mr. Tom Owen of 
the City Attorney's Office, an infraction is the lowest 
category of a criminal offense. Mr. Owen states that 
citations for infractions are issued by police officers and 
the violations are prosecuted by the District Attorney. 

Currently, there are fine amounts for such infractions 
which Mr. Owen states can only be imposed by the 
Courts. However, there are no administrative penalties 



) 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

119 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



for violations committed by Taxicab permit holders of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. According to 
Mr. Owen, an administrative penalty is a fine or 
monetary penalty levied directly by an administrative 
agency pursuant to authorizing legislation. 

The proposed ordinance would amend Article 16 of the 
Police Code by adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
authorize the Taxi Commission to impose administrative 
penalties for violations committed by Taxicab permit 
holders instead of assessing the existing fine amounts for 
infractions set by the Courts. Ms. Naomi Little, Executive 
Director of the Taxi Commission, advises that the 
proposed administrative penalty amounts have been set 
at the same level as the existing infraction fine amounts 
for violations committed by taxicab permit holders of the 
Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. According to 
Ms. Little, the existing fine amounts range from a low of 
$25 to a high of $250 for the first violation. 

Currently, Article 16 of the Police Code and Appendix 6 of 
the Administrative Code allows the Taxi Commission to 
suspend or revoke a taxicab permit if the taxicab permit 
holder violates the full-time driving requirement. In 
accordance with these Codes, taxicab permit holders are 
required to be "full-time drivers," which is defined as the 
operation of the taxi at least four hours during any 24- 
hour period on at least four hours during any 24-hour 
period on at least 75 percent of the business days during 
the calendar year. Taxicab permit holders may lease their 
Taxicab permits, at any rate they choose, to other drivers 
for the remaining time when the permit holder is not 
driving his or her taxicab. According to Mr. Owen, the 
District Attorney may prosecute violations committed by 
taxicab permit holders of the full-time driving 
requirement. However, there are neither fine amounts 
assessed for infractions nor administrative penalty 
amounts with respect to violations of the full-time driving 
requirement committed by taxicab permit holders. 

The proposed ordinance would establish an 
administrative penalty amount for violations of the full- 
time driving requirement. The penalty amount could not 
exceed 0.5 times any lease fees charged by the taxicab 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

120 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



permit holder to the other drivers who lease their 
taxicabs. 

The proposed new Sections 1186, 1187, and 1188 to 
Article 16 of the Police Code would also: 

• Establish procedures for the imposition of the new 
administrative penalties, such that the Executive 
Director notifies the taxicab permit holders in writing 
of the violation and appoints a Hearing Officer from a 
list approved by the Taxi Commission. The Hearing 
Officer would recommend the amount of the 
administrative penalty and submit that 
recommendation in writing to the Taxi Commission. 
The Taxi Commission may adopt, modify, or deny the 
Hearing Officer's recommendations, including the 
recommended penalty amounts, by a simple majority 
vote. According to Mr. Owen, taxicab permit holders 
charged with criminal violations are afforded due 
process through the Courts, whereas, taxicab permit 
holders charged with administrative violations would 
be afforded due process through an administrative 
proceeding. 

• Authorize the Taxi Commission to collect 
administrative penalties, and authorize the Taxi 
Commission to suspend or revoke the permit of the 
Taxicab permit holders, if the administrative penalty 
is unpaid after 30 days of the notice of the violation. 
Currently, the Superior Court collects the fines for 
cited infractions and issues a warrant for arrest for 
unpaid fines. Mr. Owen notes that by statute, the City 
must split any criminal fines collected for infractions 
with the State, but the City would retain all of the 
revenues generated from the collection of 
administrative penalties. 

• Prohibit the Taxi Commission from imposing 
administrative penalties for violations of the full-time 
driving requirement (a) if the permit holder is at least 
65 years of age during the calendar year when the 
violation was alleged to have occurred and had driven 
a taxicab in San Francisco for at least 25 years, or (b) 
if the taxicab permit holder is disabled and his or her 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

rzi 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Recommendation: 



failure to fulfill the full-time driving requirement was 
due to that disability. 

1. According to Ms. Little, the intent of the proposed 
ordinance is to assess administrative penalties on taxicab 
permit holders who commit violations of the Taxi 
Commission's Rules and Regulations, in addition to 
existing infraction penalties which are assessed for such 
violations, and to assess a penalty for violations of the 
full-time driving requirement. Ms. Little advises that the 
District Attorney, in the past, has not fully prosecuted 
taxicab permit holders who commit such violations. Ms. 
Little advises that in FY 2002-2003, the Police 
Department's Taxi Detail issued 34 citations, totaling 
$2,525 in fines. As of the writing of this report, Ms. Little 
does not know how much of the $2,525 of fines were paid. 

2. According to Ms. Little, and as described in the 
Attachment, "The Taxi Commission wants the ability to 
pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions 
for infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have 
to rely on the District Attorney's decision whether or not 
to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not 
invoke the full range of criminal justice procedures (with 
their attendant costs and burdening the courts). 
Furthermore, it would not stigmatize permitholders with 
criminal prosecutions. Finally, administrative penalties 
create a faster resolution of disputes." 

3. According to Ms. Little, the existing authority of the 
Taxi Commission to suspend or revoke the permits issued 
to taxicab holders for violations of the full-time driving 
requirement is too stringent because such citations 
impact the taxicab permit holder's livelihood. As 
described in the Attachment to this report, provided by 
Ms. Little, "when the Commission believes suspension or 
revocation is harsh, but needs to discipline the taxicab 
permit holder, the Commission should be able to impose 
administrative penalties." 

Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 24, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Harve 




cc: Supervisor Daly 
Supervisor Peskin 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Katie Petrucione 
Ted Lakey 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

TB 



CITY AND COUNTY OF 
SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



TO: HARVEY ROSE 

BUDGET ANALYST 



TAXI COMMISSION 
MAYOR GAVIN C. NEWSOM 

Attachment , 
Page 1 of 4 1 

ARTHUR JACKSON. PRESIDENT 

PAUL GILLESPIE, VICE PRESIDENT 

JACK. BARRY. COMMISSIONER 

PATRICIA BRESUN, COMMISSIONER 

MARY McGUTRE, COMMISSIONER 

MIN PaEK, COMMISSIONER 

MARTIN SMITH. COMMISSIONER 

NAOMI M. LTTTLE. EXECUTIVE DtRECTOR 



FROM: NAOMI LITTLE 

DATE: March 11, 2004 . 

SUBJECT: TAXI COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES 

There are currently 7,500 taxicab drivers, 1,381 taxicab permits, 30 color schemes and 10 
dispatch companies. Taxicab permitholders 1 arc required to keep their taxi cabs Ln 
continual operation. A three-layer system exists in Sail Francisco. When a permitholder 
is not driving, the permitholder leases his or her medallion to non-medallion drivers 
through color scheme holders. 2 The permitholder is paid a lease fee by d:e color scheme, 
and in turn, the color scheme charges the taxicab driver 3 a gate fee for the use of the 
vehicle for the day. All meter fare income goes directly to the driver. 

The Taxi Commission ("Commission") has pending 105 full-time driving requirement 
investigations. Additionally, the Commission is performing comprehensive audits of the 
color schemes and dispatches. 

Existing Rules and Re2»lations, Citation. Enforcement and Fine Collection 

Section 1187. Commission Rules and Regulations; Violations; Administrative 
Penalties. 

Currently, under Municipal Police Code § 1 185, violations of Article 16 of the Municipal 
Police Code, which includes Taxi Commission rules and regulations, are chargeable by 
the District Attorney as an infraction. The Police Department's Taxi Detail issues these 
citations. In Board of Supervisor Ordinance 106-99, the Board amended the Police Code 
to make violations of the Taxi Commission's Rules and Regulations an infraction by 



1 "Permit holders" are also referred as '"medallion holders." A medallion holder is any permittee licensed 

by the City to own and operate a taxicab, 

: "Color scheme holders" are pcrmirtccb licensed by the City to operate a taxicab color scheme. The phrase 

"Color Scheme Holder," "Taxicab Company" and "Taxi Company" may be used interchangeably. 

3 'Taxicab Drivers" are non-medallion holders. A taxicab driver is a permitce licensed by die City to drive 

on behalf of '.he medallion holder. 



124 

I Dr. Carlton B. Goodlet; Place, Room 448, SfuiFrajiciico, Ca 94102 
M1S1SS4-77S0. FAY Ml SI S54-7751. email: srra.ti.CQ'nmissior^reov org , website: www.sfgov.org/taxicotnjnission 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 4 



establishing fines, and outlining the degree of fines levied for violations of the Taxi 
Commission Rules. 

Existing Rules and Under Municipal Police Code § 1090, the Taxi Commission only has 
the power to suspend or revoke a permit for good cause after a noticed hearing. Good 
cause includes violating the full-time driving requirement, failure to pay a permit fee, 
operating without insurance, being convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, failure 
to satisfy a judgment for damages arising out of negligent operation, violation of the 
MunicipaJ Traffic Code or California Vehicle Code, and any other applicable statute, 
ordinance, rule or regulation pertaining to the licensing of taxi permits. 

Currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission requires a 
driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. 

Role of the SFPD Taxi Detail: 

The Police Department oversees criminal enforcement die Taxi Commission Rules and 
Regulations and the Full-Time Driving Requirements. This includes street enforcement, 
local or state law violation complaints, and lost property recovery. Street enforcement 
entails monitoring taxicabs on the street to determine whether the driver is carrying his or 
her A-card (i.e. driver's permit card), identification badge and to ensure the taxicab is in 
compliance with the California Vehicle Code, the Municipal Police Code and the Taxicab 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. The Taxi Detail additionally performs Proposition 
K, Color Scheme and Dispatch Audits for the Taxi Commission. 

For fiscal year 2002-03 the SFPD Taxi Detail issued 34 citations containing a total of 42 
violations as follows: 

23 violations for $25 = $575.00 

16 violations for 75 = 1,200.00 

3 violations for 250 = 750.00 

Total = $2,525.00 

This process was not fully operational throughout the entire fiscal year. The Taxi Detail 
wanted to issue more infraction citations than they were allowed because the Superior 
Court had not approved all of the infraction penalties for the Taxi Commission Rules & 
Regulations. Even though the Board of Supervisors and Taxi Commission approved the 
infraction penalties, the infraction penalties are subject to Superior Court approval. 

Also, infraction citations are not forwarded to the DA's office. They are submitted 
directly to the Superior Courts. They are handled the same as traffic tickets. Cases that 
would be cited as misdemeanors do go to the DA's office. 



125 



Attachment 
Page 6 of 4 



Problems with Existing Citation, Enforcement and Fine Collection Procedures 

La performing audits each year, the Taxi Commission is finding that color schemes are 
continuing to violate certain Taxi Commission Rules. Suspension or revocation of a 
color scheme permit (i.e. taxicab company) is extremely drastic because it not only 
affects the color scheme, but the numerous drivers and taxicab permit holders that are 
affiliated with the color scheme. Suspension of a color scheme essentially suspends the 
taxicab permit holders 1 permits at that color scheme, regardless if the taxicab permit 
holders violated any rules. The Taxi Commission needs a vehicle to discipline color 
scheme permit holders without affecting the medallion holders or driven. 

As explained, currently, for minor violations of the Commission rules, the Commission 
requires a driver to attend taxi school or the SFPD Taxi Detail gives a verbal or written 
admonishment. These penalties do not serve as deterrence. It is just the cost of doing 
business. 

Administrative penalties create a process of escalated discipline that begins with fines 
and leads all the way up to revocation. Byway of history, most permitholders believe 
that the San Francisco Board of Appeals will overturn Taxi Commission revocation of 
permit decisions for failure to comply with the full-time driving requirement. The Board 
of Appeals has criticized the Taxi Commission for immediately suspending or revoking a 
permit for failure to comply with the full-time driving requirement after the first offense. 
They believe this measure is extreme. More likely than not, the Board of Appeals will 
start upholding the Taxi Commission revocation decisions, if the Commission penalized 
the permitholder on an progressive scale: i.e. an administrative fine for the first offense; 
suspension for the second offense; and revocation for the third offense. 

Additionally, suspending or revoking a permit because a permitholder fell short of the 
fulltime-driving requirement by a few shifts; or violated the Commission rule of 
possessing and issuing comment cards is a drastic measure. When the Commission 
believes suspension or revocation is harsh, but needs to discipline the permitholder, the 
Commission should be able to impose administrative penalties. 

Supervisor Sandoval's Amendment tothe Whole Dated 2/18/Q4 

The Commission believes administrative penalties will encourage all permitholders to 
comply with Commission rules. Permitholders will take their chances that if they appeal 
the Commission's revocation decision to the Board of Appeals, the Board will overturn 
the Taxi Commission's decision. 

Fines for violating the full-time driving requirement will not exceed .5 times any lease 
fee collected by the permitholder during the period that he or she did not meet the full- 
time driving requirement. Or, where the permitholder does not collect lease fees, the 
Commission may impose administrative penalty not to exceed an amount yet to be 



126 



Attachment 
Page 4 ot t 



determined. For example, if the permitholder lease fee is $1,800 4 , then the fine could be 
up to S9,000. Whereas, under the original Taxi Commission proposed legislation, the 
lease fee would be up to $2,700 (i.e. 1 .5 times the lease fee). In imposing the fine, the 
Taxi Commission can take into account whether the permitholder had previous 
violations, whether there was willful concealment and/or misrepresentations to the Taxi 
Commission, or mitigating circumstances. 

In imposing administrative penalties, which the proposed ordinance would establish, the 
Commission would like to use the same infraction fine schedule. The Taxi Commission 
wants the ability to pursue administrative penalties rather than prosecutions for 
infractions. As a result, the Commission does not have to rely on the District Attorney's 
decision whether or not to pursue charges. Administrative penalties would not invoke the 
full range of criminal justice procedures (with their attendant costs and burdening the 
courts). Furthennore, it would not stigmatize pemiitholders with criminal prosecutions. 
Finally, administrative penalties create a faster resolution of disputes. 

Taxi Commission Hearing Procedures 

Beginning in July 2003, the Taxi Commission established a hearing officer to hear all 
disciplinary cases that were brought before the Taxi Commission. To protect the rights 
of all the taxi permitholders, the Heanng Officer is not an employee of the Taxi 
Commission, but a Department of Parking and Traffic Hearing Officer. These 
disciplinary hearings are heard on the first Friday of every month. The Hearing Officer 
conducts the hearing, and makes a recommended decision. The final decision is placed 
on the Taxi Commission's consent calendar for the next scheduled meeting. 

Any time the Taxi Commission grant, denies, suspends or revokes a pennit, the matter 
may be appealed to the San Francisco Board of Appeals within 15 days of the Taxi 
Commission decision pursuant to Charter 4.106. 



'TnDecembcr 1998, Police Code 1135.2 set a lease fee cap of SI, SOO/month. However, in December 
2000, the provision expired. Currently, Lhe lease fee is set by market cbmends. 



127 




City and County ofJ>an Francisco 

Meeting Agenda 

Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 



City Hal! 
I Dr Carlton B Goodlett Place 
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689 



Clerk: Mary Red 



Wednesday, March 31, 2004 12:30 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Special Meeting 



Note: Each item on the Consent or Regular agenda may include the following documents: 

1) Legislation 

2) Budget Analyst report 

3) Legislative Analyst report 

4) Department or Agency cover letter and/or report 

5) Public correspondence 

These items will be available for review at City Hall, Room 244, Reception Desk. 



>• IS I 



Each member of the public will be allotted the same maximum number of minutes to speak as set by 
the Chair at the beginning of each item, excluding City representatives, except that public speakers 
using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony 
time limit. If simultaneous translation sendees are used, speakers will be governed by the public 
testimony time limit applied to speakers not requesting translation assistance. 

AGENDA CHANGES DOCUMENTS DEPT 

MAR 2 6 200<t 

CLOSED SESSION - SPECIAL ORDER 12:30 PM SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 

Conference with the City's Labor Negotiators: Collective Bargaining 

Motion that the Board of Supenisors Finance and Audits Committee convene in closed session with 
the City Attorney, City's Labor Relations Negotiators, Mayor and Director of Human Relations, for 
the purpose of reviewing the City's positions in pending labor negotiations with organizations 
representing the City employee groups listed on agenda. This closed session is permitted by 
Government Code Section 54957.6(a), and San Francisco Administrative Code Section ()7.S. 



City ami County of San Francitco t 1'rinictl at -■■to I'M 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March .?/, 2004 

1. 040369 [Labor Negotiations] 

Supervisor Daly 

Closed session hearing to consider the progress of labor negotiations between the City and County of 
San Francisco and affected bargaining units. 

3/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 
City 's Negotiators: Mayor and Human Resources Director 

Organizations Representing: 

Automotive Machinists, Local 1414; Bricklayers Local 3/Hod Carriers, Local 36; 

Building Inspectors Association: Chief Building Inspectors: 

Carpenters, Local 22; Cement Mason, Local 580; 

Deputy Sheriffs' Association: District Attorney Investigators Association 

Electrical Workers, Local 6: Glaziers, Local 718; 

International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Local 16; 

Ironworkers, Local 377; Laborers International Union, Local 261; 

Municipal Attorneys' Association; Municipal Executives Association; MEA - Police Management; 

MEA Fire Management; 

Operating Engineers, Local 3; Painters, Local 4; Pile Drivers, Local 34; 

Plasterers and Shophands, Local 66; Plumbers, Local 38; 

Probation Officers Association; Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21; 

Roofers, Local 40; SF1RA/CA1R/C1R/SEIU (Interns and Residents); 

S. F. Institutional Police Officers Association; 

S. F. Firefighters, Local 798 Unit 1; S. F. Firefighters, Local 798 Unit 11: 

S. F. Police Officers Association; SEW Local 250 

SEIU Local 535; SEW Local 790; SEW Local 790 (Staff Nurses); 

SEW (H-l) Rescue Paramedics); Sheet Metal Workers, Local 104; 

Stationary Engineers, Local 39; 

Supervising Probation Officers, Operating Engineers Local 3; 

Teamsters, Local 350; Teamsters, Local 853; 

Teamsters, Local 856 (Multi Unity); Teamsters, Local 856 (Supervising Nurses); 

TWU, Local 200 (SEAM Multi Unit); TWU, Local 250-A, (7410); 

TWU, Local 250-A, (9163); TWU, Local 250-A, (Multi Unit); 

Union ofAmer. Physicians & Dentists; Unrepresented Employees 

After a closed session, if one occurs, the Committee shall adopt a motion either to disclose or not to 
disclose. 



(Elect To Disclose] 

Motion that the Committee finds it is in the public interest to disclose information discussed in closed 
session, and directs the Chair immediately to disclose that information. 



/Elect Not to Disclose] 

Motion that the Committee finds that it is in the best interest of the public that the Committee elect at 
this time not to disclose its closed session deliberations concerning the anticipated litigation listed 
above. 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at 2:40 I'M on 3/25/04 



Ununce and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 31, 2004 

SPECIAL ORDER - 1:00 PM 



040344 [Ryan White CARE Act Funding FY 2004-2005] 
Supervisor Daly 

Hearing to consider the impacts of Ryan White CARE Act funding reductions in the Fiscal Year 2004- 
2005. and discuss the development of a supplemental appropriation. The hearing will address the 
following issues: ( 1 ) Actions of the HIV Health Services Planning Council to prioritize funding; (2 ) 
Implementation of Planning Council prioritization by DPH; (3) Service impacts to local residents; (4) 
Marin and San Mateo County funding levels; (5) Efforts of our federal representatives to restore 
funding; (6) Using Medi-Cal to ensure that CARE funding is used as the funding of last resort; (7) 
Reducing administrative costs; (8) Whether elimination of services such as transportation, 
decentralized dental care, outpatient substance abuse, childcare. treatment adherence, legal and 
imrnigatior. assistance and complementary therapies are sound public policy. 

3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



REGULAR AGENDA 



040262 [Mayor's Summer Food Service Program] 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Children. Youth, and Their Families to accept and expend a 
grant in the amount of $599,215 from the United States Department of Agriculture for the 2004 
Mayor's Summer Food Service Program. (Mayor) 

3/8/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee. 



040226 [Sale of Surplus Property at 107 24th Avenue] 

Resolution authorizing the sale of surplus City-owned real property located at 107 24th Avenue 
(Block 1334, Lot 1); adopting findings that the sale is exempt from Environmental Review and is 
consistent wiih the City's General Plan and Eight Priority Policies of City Planning Code Section 
101.1; and authorizing the Director of Property to proceed with its sale at public auction. (Real Estate 
Department) 

3/9/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



040100 [Process for Sale of Real Property] 
Supervisor Peskin 

Ordinance authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to solicit proposals and bids for the sale of 
certain real properties with development potential that are not needed for utility purposes, subject to 
the review and approval by the Board of Supervisors, by resolution, of any final sale of such 
properties. 

1/27/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee. 



City and County of San Francisco 3 Printed at 2:40 PM OH 3/25/04 



Finance and Audita Committee 



Meeliiif: Agenda 



Wednesday, March .!/. 2004 



((40239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30. 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in 
classifications 0922 Manager I. 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV. 0933 
Manager V. 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII. 0943 Manager VIII. 1237 Training Coordinator, 
1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant. 2998 Representative, Commission on Status of 
Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 
Planner 2. 5283 Planner 5. 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 7334 Stationary Engineer, 
and 9343 Roofer, and 11-30 Captain (Fire Department). (Human Resources Department) 

3/5/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040272 [Public Employment] 
Mayor 

Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 195-03 (Annual Salary Ordinance 2003/04) reflecting the 
deletion of 189.90 positions in the following departments: Administrative Services, Adult Probation, 
Adult and Aging Services. Airport. Assessor, Convention Facilities, Emergency Communications, 
Environment, Human Resources, Juvenile Probation, Municipal Transportation Agency, Police, 
Public Health. Recreation and Park. Sheriff and Telecommunication and Information Services. 

3/9/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040037 [Lease of Real Property - 1145 Market Street] 

Resolution authorizing the lease of 30.790 sq. ft. of office space in the building located at 1 145 
Market Street. San Francisco for the City and County of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. 
(Real Estate Department) 

1/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 
3/24/04. CONTINUED. Continued to 3/31/04. 



040099 [Dept. of Administrative Services to provide services to public entities] 
Supervisor Dufty 

Ordinance authorizing the Department of Administrative Services to enter into written agreements 
with other public entities to provide the public entities with publishing, copying, printing and/or mail 
services, and ratifying and approving any actions heretofore taken by the Department of 
Administrative Services to provide such services to public entities. 

1/27/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 2:40 I'M on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday. March '/, 2004 

10. 021505 [Ordinance adding Section 21.25-3 to the Administrative Code] 

Supervisors Ammiano, Daly 

Ordinance adding Section 21.25-3 to the Administrative Code to require that workers engaged in 
rigging, sound, projection, theatrical lighting, videos, computers, draping, carpentry, special effects, 
and motion picture services on property owned or leased by the City and County of San Francisco be 
paid the prevailing rate of wage and that such workers will have job protection with the successor 
contractor tor a transition period after a lease, management agreement or other contractual 
arrangement is terminated. 

8/26/02, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance Committee, expires on 9/25/2002 

0/13/02. REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Small Business Commission for comment and recommendation 

2/5/03, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee New committee structure 2/1 7/03 

8/28/03. FILED PURSUANT TO RULE 5.37 

3/9/04, REACTIVATED PURSUANT TO RULE 5 23. Supervisor Daly requested this matter be reactivated 

3/9/04. ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 

ADJOURNMENT 
IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City, by the time the proceedings 
begin, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a part of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. Any 
written comments should be sent to: Committee Clerk of the Finance and Audits Committee. San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 
94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the 
committee clerk by that time may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 



(Not to be considered at this meeting) 

Rule 5.40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREATE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction. The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing. In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken. 



There are no items now pending under the 30-dav Rule. 



City and County of San Francisco 5 Printed at 2:411 I'M on 3/25104 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday. March .?/. 2004 

Meeting Procedures 

The Board of Supervisors is the Legislative Body of the City and County of San Francisco. The Board has 

several standing Committees where ordinances and resolutions are the subject of hearings at which members of 

the public are urged to testify. The full Board does not hold a second public hearing on measures which have 

been heard in committee. 

Board procedures do not permit: 1 ) persons in the audience at a Committee meeting to vocally express support 

or opposition to statements by Supervisors or by other persons testifying; 2) ringing and use of cell phones. 

pagers, and similar sound-producing electronic devices; 3) signs to be brought into the meeting or displayed in 

the room; 4) standing in the meeting room. 

Citizens are encouraged to testify at Committee meetings and to write letters to the Clerk of a Committee or to 

its members. City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244. San Francisco. CA 94102. 

Agenda are available on the internet at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs.bos.htm. 

THE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLF FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL. ROOM 244, RECEPTION 

DESK. 

Board meetings are cablecasl on SF Cable 26. For video tape copies and scheduling call (415) 557-4293. 

Requests for language translation at a meeting must be received no later than noon the Friday before the 

meeting. Contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554-7704. 

AVISO EN ESPANOL: La solicitud para un traductor en una reunion debe recibirse antes de mediodia de el 

viernes anterior a la reunion. Llame a Erasmo Vazquez (415) 554-4909. 

mm ■zftK&MmM 'i>m m 'hmmm w$ 

ifftg (415) 554-7701 



Disability Access 

Both the Committee Room (Room 263) and the Legislative Chamber are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #47 Van Ness, and the #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, 

call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of City Hall at Civic Center Plaza and adjacent to Davies Hall and the 

War Memorial Complex. 

All meetings are real-time captioned and are cablecast open-captioned on SF Cable 26. 

The following services are available when requested 48 hours before the Committee meeting. This advance 

notice will help ensure availability. 

• For American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting, contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554- 
7704. 

• For a large print copy of agenda or minutes in alternative formats, contact Annette Lonich at (415) 554-7706. 

• Assistive listening devices are available from the receptionist in the Clerk of the Board's Office, Room 244. 
prior to the meeting. 

■ The Clerk of the Board's Office TTY number is (415) 554-5227. 

In order to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or 
related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various 
chemical based products. 



City and County of San Francisco (> Printed at 2:40 I'M on 3/25/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday. March .?/. 2004 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine 
Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the 
people's review. For information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Donna Hall; by mail to Sunshine 
Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco CA 94102 by phone at (415) 
554-7724. by fax at (415) 554-7854 or by email at Donna.Hall@sfgov.org 

Citizens may obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance by contacting Ms. Hall or by printing Chapter 67 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code on the Internet, at http://www.sfgov.org/sunshine.htm 

Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements 

Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be 
required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance [SF Campaign & Governmental Conduct Code Sec. 2.100] to 
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the 
San Francisco Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102; telephone 
(415) 581-2300; fax (415) 581-2317; website www.sfgov.org/ethics 



City and County of San Francisco 7 Printed at 2:40 PM on 3/25/04 



FINANCE AND AUDITS COMMITTEE 
ST. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY HALL, ROOM 244 
1 DR. CARLTON GOOD1 II 1 PLACE 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-4689 

IMPORTANT HEARING NOTICE!!! 




City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Minutes 

Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 
Clerk: Mary Red 



City Hall 

1 Dr. Carlton B 

Goodlett Place 

San Francisco, CA 

94102-4689 



Wednesday, March 31, 2004 



12:30 PM 
Special Meeting 



City Hall, Room 263 



i$\ 



Members Present: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano. 






Meeting Convened 

The meeting convened at 12:40 p.m. 

CLOSED SESSION - SPECIAL ORDER 12:30 PM 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
APR ~ 5 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC libra;-./ 



Conference with the City's Labor Negotiators: Collective Bargaining 

Unanimous vote to convene in closed session by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



[All Committees] 

Government Document Section 

Main Library 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 3:1? I'M on 4/1/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 31, 2004 



040369 [Labor Negotiations] 
Supervisor Daly 

Closed session hearing to consider the progress of labor negotiations between the City and County of San 
Francisco and affected bargaining units. 

(City's Negotiators: Mayor and Human Resources Director 
Organizations Representing: 

Automotive Machinists, Local 1414; Bricklayers Local 3/Hod Carriers, Local 36; 
Building Inspectors Association; Chief Building Inspectors; 
Carpenters, Local 22; Cement Mason, Local 580; 

Deputy Sheriffs' Association; District Attorney Investigators Association 
Electrical Workers, Local 6; Glaziers, Local 718; 
International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Local 16; 
Ironworkers, Local 377; Laborers International Union, Local 261; 

Municipal Attorneys' Association; Municipal Executives Association; MEA - Police Management; MEA Fire 
Management; 

Operating Engineers, Local 3; Painters, Local 4; Pile Drivers, Local 34; 
Plasterers and Shophands, Local 66; Plumbers, Local 38; 
Probation Officers Association; Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21; 
Roofers, Local 40; SFIRA/CAIR/CIR/SEIU (Interns and Residents); 
S. F. Institutional Police Officers Association; 

S. F. Firefighters, Local 798 Unit 1; S. F. Firefighters, Local 798 Unit 1 1 ; 
S. F. Police Officers Association; SEIU Local 250 
SEIU Local 535; SEIU Local 790; SEIU Local 790 (Staff Nurses); 
SEIU (H-l) Rescue Paramedics); Sheet Metal Workers, Local 104; 
Stationary Engineers, Local 39; 

Supervising Probation Officers, Operating Engineers Local 3; 
Teamsters, Local 350; Teamsters, Local 853; 

Teamsters, Local 856 (Multi Unity); Teamsters, Local 856 (Supervising Nurses); 
TWU, Local 200 (SEAM Multi Unit); TWU, Local 250-A, (7410); 
TWU, Local 250-A, (9163); TWU, Local 250-A, (Multi Unit); 
Union of Amer. Physicians & Dentists; Unrepresented Employees) 
3/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee 
CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



Report on Closed Session 



Unanimous vote not to disclose discussion to the public by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



Deputy City Attorney Ted Lakey reported that the Finance Committee has met in closed session with the City 
Attorney, under the provisions of Government Code Section 54956.9 (a) and Administrative Code Section 67.8 
(3), for the purpose of conferring with, or receiving advice from, the City Attorney regarding settlements in the 
lawsuits or claims listed above. 



City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed al 3:1 7 FM on 4/1/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 31, 2004 



[Elect Not to Disclose] 

Motion that the Committee finds that it is in the best interest of the public that the Committee elect at this time 
not to disclose its closed session deliberations concerning the anticipated litigation listed above. 



SPECIAL ORDER - 1:00 PM 



040344 [Ryan White CARE Act Funding FY 2004-2005] 
Supervisors Daly, Dufty 

Hearing to consider the impacts of Ryan White CARE Act funding reductions in the Fiscal Year 2004-2005, 
and discuss the development of a supplemental appropriation. The hearing will address the following issues: 
(1) Actions of the HIV Health Services Planning Council to prioritize funding; (2) Implementation of Planning 
Council prioritization by DPH; (3) Service impacts to local residents; (4) Mann and San Mateo County funding 
levels; (5) Efforts of our federal representatives to restore funding; (6) Using Medi-Cal to ensure that CARE 
funding is used as the funding of last resort; (7) Reducing administrative costs; (8) Whether elimination of 
services such as transportation, decentralized dental care, outpatient substance abuse, childcare, treatment 
adherence, legal and immigation assistance and complementary therapies are sound public policy. 
3/16/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; James Lloyce, Health Department; Supervisor Ammiano; 
Monique Zmuda, Controller's Office; Ed Brown, Congresswoman Pelosi's Office; Brad Hume, Care Council; 
Catherine Gueneracos; Alan Meyer, S. F. Community Clinic Consortium; Bill Hirsh, AIDS Legal Referral; 
Carla Wilson, Quan Yin Healing Arts Center; Elyse Graham, Executive Director, Immune Enhancement 
Project; Richard Johnson; Lixin Huang, American College of TCM; Pam Olton; Rachel Matillane, Pacific 
Islander Wellness Clinic; John Manzon-Santos; Perry Lang, Executive Director, Black Coalition on AIDS; 
Mana Rmeldi, Instituto Familia de la Raza; Hywel Sims, Executive Director, Shanti; Mark Cloutier, Executive 
Director, Continuim; Fernando Gomez, Director, Mission Neighborhood Health Center; Molly Newlon, DDS. 
UCSF School of Dentistry; Ana Montana, Attorney, ALRP Immigration HIV Program; Donald Frazier, 
Walden House, Inc.; Shenain Adams, Larkin Street Youth Services; Erin McGrath, Mayor's Office; Supervisor 
Peskin. 
FILED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



REGULAR AGENDA 



040262 [Mayor's Summer Food Service Program] 

Resolution authorizing the Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families to accept and expend a grant in 
the amount of $599,215 from the United States Department of Agriculture for the 2004 Mayor's Summer Food 
Service Program. (Mayor) 

3/8/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speaker: Camillc Wise, Department of Children. Youth and Their Families. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 3 fruited at 3: IT HM on 411104 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



March 31, 2004 



040226 [Sale of Surplus Property at 107 24th Avenue] 

Resolution authorizing the sale of surplus City-owned real property located at 107 24th Avenue (Block 1334, 

Lot 1); adopting findings that the sale is exempt from Environmental Review and is consistent with the City's 

General Plan and Eight Priority Policies of City Planning Code Section 101.1; and authorizing the Director of 

Property to proceed with its sale at public auction. (Real Estate Department) 

3/9/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Peskin; Steve Legnitto, Acting Director of Property, Real Estate 

Department; Peter Winkelstein; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney; Tom McAfee; Mary McAfee; Kimball 

Livingston; Deborah McCloud; Lauren Lamm; Susanne Lissak; Super\>isor Daly; Super\>isor Ammiano; Gary 

Dowd, PUC Real Estate. 

Amended on page 1, line 10 to change "10,179" to "9,562"; same title. 

AMENDED. 

Continued to July 14, 2004. 

CONTINUED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040100 [Process for Sale of Real Property] 
Supervisor Peskin 

Ordinance authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to solicit proposals and bids for the sale of certain real 
properties with development potential that are not needed for utility purposes, subject to the review and 
approval by the Board of Supervisors, by resolution, of any final sale of such properties. 
1/27/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supen'isor Peskin; Gary Dowd, PUC Real Estate; David Pilpel; Ted Lakey, 
Deputy City Attorney. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in classifications 
0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI. 
0942 Manager VII, 0943 Manager VIII, 1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management 
Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 
Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy 
Specialist, 7334 Stationary Engineer, and 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain (Fire Department). (Human 
Resources Department) 

3/5/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Deputy Director, Human Resources Department; 
Supervisor Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Richard 
Rolhman; Cindy, Local 790. 
Continued to April 14, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



Cay and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 3:17 PM on 4/1/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



March 31, 2004 



040272 [Public Employment] 
Mayor 

Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 195-03 (Annual Salary Ordinance 2003/04) reflecting the deletion of 
189.90 positions in the following departments: Administrative Services, Adult Probation, Adult and Aging 
Services, Airport, Assessor, Convention Facilities, Emergency Communications, Environment, Human 
Resources, Juvenile Probation, Municipal Transportation Agency, Police, Public Health, Recreation and Park, 
Sheriff and Telecommunication and Information Services. (Municipal Transportation Agency) 
3/9/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Ben Rosenfield, Mayor's Office; Supennsor Daly; Elizabeth Goldstein, 
General Manager, Recreation and Park Department; Denise Couther-Graham, Local 790; Male speaker, 
Local 790; Peter Ashe; Amy Dawson, Director, Randall Museum; Supervisor Peskin; Ted Lakey, Deputy City 
Attorney; David Pilpel; Lorraine Grassano, Park Patrol Officer. 
Amendment of the Whole. 

Municipal Transportation Agency requested to be added as a cosponsor. 
AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 195-03 (Annual Salary Ordinance 2003/04) reflecting the deletion of 
187.4 positions in the following departments: Administrative Services, Adult Probation, Adult and Aging 
Services, Airport, Assessor, Convention Facilities, Emergency Communications, Environment, Human 
Resources, Juvenile Probation, Municipal Transportation Agency, Police, Public Health, Recreation and Park, 
Sheriff and Telecommunication and Information Services. (Municipal Transportation Agency) 
REFERRED WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040037 [Lease of Real Property - 1145 Market Street] 

Resolution authorizing the lease of 30,790 sq. ft. of office space in the building located at 1145 Market Street, 
San Francisco for the City and County of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. (Real Estate Department) 
1/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/24/04. CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Harlan Kelly, Jr., Public Utilities Commission (PUC); Supervisor Peskin. 
Lawrence Banner. Acting Director. Planning Department: Supervisor Daly, Supervisor Ammiano. Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst: Paul 
Maltzer. Planning Department, Jean Manani, PUC; Gary Dow. PUC Real Estate. Steve Legnitto, Real Eslate Department: David 
Novogrodsky. Local 21; Sally Ramon; Chns Durazo; Mel Beetle; Delbert Scott; Victor Herrera. 
Continued to 3/3 1/04 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Steve Legnitto, Real Estate Department; Supervisor Daly; David 

Novogrodsky, Local 21; Harlen Kelly, Jr., Public Utilities Commission; Supervisor Peskin; Supervisor 

Ammiano. 

Supervisor Daly absent for the vote. 

REFERRED WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Ammiano 

Absent: 1 - Daly 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 3:17 I'M on J/1/U4 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes March 31, 2004 



040099 [Dept. of Administrative Services to provide services to public entities] 
Supervisor Dufty 

Ordinance authorizing the Department of Administrative Services to enter into written agreements with other 

public entities to provide the public entities with publishing, copying, printing and/or mail services, and 

ratifying and approving any actions heretofore taken by the Department of Administrative Services to provide 

such services to public entities. 

1/27/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee 

Heard in Committee. Speaker: David German, Reproduction Bureau. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Ammiano 

Absent: 1 - Daly 



021505 [Ordinance adding Section 21.25-3 to the Administrative Code] 
Supervisors Ammiano, Daly 

Ordinance adding Section 21.25-3 to the Administrative Code to require that workers engaged in rigging, 

sound, projection, theatrical lighting, videos, computers, draping, carpentry, special effects, and motion picture 

services on property owned or leased by the City and County of San Francisco be paid the prevailing rate of 

wage and that such workers will have job protection with the successor contractor for a transition period after a 

lease, management agreement or other contractual arrangement is terminated. 

8/26/02, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance Committee, expires on 9/25/2002 

9/13/02, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Small Business Commission for comment and recommendation. 

2/5/03. TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. New committee structure 2/17/03 

8/28/03. FILED PURSUANT TO RULE 5.37. 

3/9/04. REACTrVATED PURSUANT TO RULE 5.23 Supervisor Daly requested this matter be reactivated 

3/9/04, ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Josh Pastreich, Local 16; Edward. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Peskin, Ammiano 
Absent: 1 - Daly 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m. 



City and County of San Francisco 6 Printed at 3:18 PM on 411104 



CITY AND COUNTY 




OFJAN FRANCISCO 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

1390 Market Street, Suite 1025, San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-7642 
FAX (415) 252-0461 



o-ZSI 



March 24, 2004 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



TO: < Finance and Audits Committee 

FROM: f Budget Analyst 

SUBJECT: March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 4 - File 04-0226 



MAR 2 9 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Administrative Services, Real 
Estate Division (RED) 

Resolution authorizing the sale of surplus City- 
owned real property located at 107 24 th Avenue, 
Block 1334, Lot 1; adopting findings that the sale is 
exempt from Environmental Review and is 
consistent with the City's General Plan and Eight 
Priority Policies of City Planning Code Section 
101.1; and authorizing the Director of Property to 
proceed with its sale at public auction. 

The subject property consists of approximately 
9,562 square feet of vacant land (approximately 
0.220 acres) owned by the City under the 
jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission 
(PUC). The proposed resolution would authorize 
the City's Director of Property to sell the subject 
property at public auction to the highest bidder. 
According to Mr. Larry Ritter of RED, proceeds 
from the sale of the property would be deposited to 
the PUC's Clean Water Fund. According to Mr. 
Steve Legnitto, Acting Director of RED, the subject 
vacant land was formerly the location of a private, 



[Budget Analyst Report] 
SF Public Library 
Govt. Information Center, 5 th Fir. 
ATTN: Michael Sherrod-Flores 



Memo to rmance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



single family residence. After a sewer failure in 
December 1995, the single family residence 
collapsed, causing damage to the single family 
residence and to neighboring properties. The 
subject property was then purchased by the City 
from owners Howard and Ira Billman for 
$3,065,000 based on a legal settlement, which is 
explained further in Attachment I, a memo 
provided by Mr. Legnitto. Mr. Legnitto explains 
further that the sewer has since been relocated. 
The PUC declared on March 9, 1999 the subject 
vacant land to be surplus to the needs of the PUC 
and has recommended the sale of the subject 
property at public auction. Attachment II provides 
a map of the subject property. According to Mr. 
Ritter, the subject vacant land has been rezoned for 
two separate single family residences, as further 
described below. 

According to the proposed resolution, prior to the 
sale at public auction, RED will subdivide the 
property into two lots. Lot A will consist of 5,362 
square feet and Lot B will consist of 4,200 square 
feet, for a total of 9,562 square feet, as shown in 
Attachment II. According to Mr. Ritter, RED 
estimates that the sale value of the property will be 
greater after subdivision into two lots instead of 
selling one large lot. Mr. Ritter adds that if the 
subject resolution is approved by the Board of 
Supervisors, RED will then set a minimum bid to 
sell the subject propert3 r at public auction which is 
estimated to be held in June of 2004. The minimum 
bid will be based on an independent appraisal of 
the property to be conducted by John Clifford and 
Associates, an appraisal firm retained by the RED. 
According to Mr. Ritter, the minimum bid for Lot A 
is estimated to be set at $1,350,000 for 5,362 
square feet, or $251.77 per square foot, and the 
minimum bid for Lot B is estimated to be set at 
$1,500,000 for 4,200 square feet, or $357.14 per 
square foot, for total estimated sale proceeds of 
$2,850,000, or an average of $298.05 per square 
foot. Mr. Ritter advises that the buyers would be 
responsible for all closing costs and RED would 
receive a reimbursement of approximately $30,000 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

2 



iviemo to finance ana /\uuns ^ommixiee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Comments: 



Recommendations: 



from the sale proceeds for RED's administrative 
costs be incurred in connection with the proposed 
sales. 

1. According to Mr. Ritter, the City has incurred 
significant costs on this property since it was 
acquired in 1995. Attachment III, provided by 
RED, shows that as of October 20, 2000, the PUC 
has incurred a net loss of $2,745,843 due to sewer 
repair costs and claims. According to Mr. Ritter 
and Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC, this is the most 
recent fiscal accounting of the costs related to the 
subject property. 

2. According to the Planning Department, the 
subject vacant land is categorically exempt from 
environmental review and the proposed sale has 
been reviewed for consistency with applicable 
objectives and policies of the General Plan and 
eight Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 
101.1. 

3. The proposed resolution states the surplus 
property contains a total of 10,179 square feet, but 
as shown in Attachment II, Lots A and B total 
9,562 square feet, which is the correct square 
footage of the property, according to Mr. Ritter. 
Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends that 
the proposed resolution be amended accordingly. 

1. Amend the subject resolution on page 1, line 10 
to state that the subject property contains a total 
area of 9,562 square feet instead of the stated 
10,179 square feet. 

2. Approve the proposed resolution as amended. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

3 




City and County of San Francisco Real Estate Division 

Administrative Services Department 

1*1 

March 5, 2004 



Through Darryl Burton, Director PUC 

Department of Administrative Services Public Auction Sale 

107 -24 th Avenue 
Honorable Board of Supervisors Block 1334, Lot 1 

City & County of San Francisco 
City Hall, Room 244 
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place 
San Francisco, CA 94102 

Dear Board Members: 

We recommend approval of the enclosed Resolution authorizing the sale at public 
auction of Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 1334 consisting of 10,179± sq. ft. of vacant land. 
Prior to the sale a Parcel Map will be filed subdividing the parcel into two lots, as shown 
on the attached drawing. The lots will be sold individually at public auction. 

After a sewer failure in December^ 1995, which resulted in the loss of the residence on 
this site and damage to other neighboring properties, the City settled claims with the 
various property owners and their insurance companies. As part of the settlement, the 
City acquired title to this 'site. Subsequently, the sewer has been relocated and the site 
stabilized so that it can now be developed. The Public Utilities Commission pursuant to 
its Resolution No. 99-0046 has determined that the subject property is surplus to its 
present and future needs and has authorized the sale at public auction. 

The Director of Planning in his letter dated August 8, 2000, a copy of which is enclosed, 
has determined that the sale of this property is categorically exempt from Environmental 
Review and in conformity with the General Plan and consistent with the Eight Priority 
Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1. 

Should you have any questions or need additional information, do not hesitate to call 
Larry Ritter of our office at 554-9874. 

Sincerely, 

Steve Legnitto £ 
Acting Director of Property 
Enclosures 

^c: Gary Dowd, PUC 

John Martin, DPW/BSM 
Daniel Myers, Esq. 

ITTERV5785 PUC Dap Prop'BOS Ltr.doc 

Office of the Director of Property ^ 
16 25 Van Ness Avenue. Suite 400 San Francisco. 941 02 



Atta chment II 



107 24th Avenue, Block 1334, Lot 1 
Seacliff Financial Status 

as of October 20, 2000 

Sewer Repairs 

Labor 554,388.00 

Non-Labor 27.279.00 

Construction Services 8,573,229.00 

Professional Services 1,489,823.00 

Legal Services 1 , 1 07,335.00 

Total 11,752,054.00 

Claims 

Howard & Ira Billman 3,055,000.00 

State Farm Insurance 1,842,500.00 

Thomas McAfee 10,000.00 

Pacific Gas &. Electric 80,000.00 

Faye Bernstein 92,000.00 

Walter & Ramona Yee 1 ,648,000.00 

Peter & Barbara Wlnklestem 590,000.00 

Misc. third party claims 1 46,1 30.00 

GGRNA 300,000.00 

Total 7,773,530.00 

***OES Repayment 1,366,769.00 



Total Seacliff Expenses 20,892,453.00 

Amount Recovered on Claims 1 0,423,256.65 

State Office of Emergency Services 8,628,317.00 

Additional Anticipated Recovery 

OES Payment Authorized 862,832.00 

Total Future Recovery 862,832.00 



Total Recovery 19,914,405.65 

Estimated Interest Loss 1,767,796.00 * 



Net Gain (Loss) on Seacliff Emergency (2,745,843.35) 

' Estimated Interest Loss based on Funding from Clean Water for repairs. 
***(0ES)= Office of Emergency Services 



Q:\OATA\ADMINPUC\SHORTTEHM\DARBY\MISCV£eacItff on 08/09/2001 al 10:27 AM 

T0TRL P.G 

MAP-15-2004 13:34 ° 3Q7. P. 02 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 5 - File 04-0100 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Administrative Services, Real Estate 
Division (RED) 

Ordinance authorizing the Public Utilities Commission to 
solicit proposals and bids for the sale of certain real 
properties with development potential that are surplus to 
the needs of the PUC and not needed for utility purposes, 
subject to the review and approval by the Board of 
Supervisors, by resolution, of any final sale of such 
properties. 

The proposed ordinance authorizes the Public Utilities 
Commission (PUC) to enter into exclusive negotiations 
with developers for the purpose of selling to the 
developers properties considered as surplus to the needs 
of the PUC. According to the proposed ordinance, this 
legislation would allow potential developers to pursue 
entitlements while working in conjunction with the PUC. 
According to Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC, entitlements are 
requirements that must be met by a developer as a 
condition of approval of a development project by the City 
or County having jurisdiction over the development 
project, such as approval of a change in zoning, prior to 
final approval of the development. According to Mr. Dowd, 
many surplus PUC properties would have potential sale 
values substantially greater than the current "as is" value 
of the properties, if the properties could be rezoned, 
subdivided or otherwise developed for their highest and 
best use. According to Mr. Dowd, currently there are three 
PUC properties to which this ordinance would apply. Mr. 
Dowd has provided a description of these three PUC 
properties on page 3 of Attachment I. 

According to Mr. Dowd, the proposed ordinance would 
allow the PUC to sell surplus properties without going 
through the Department of Administrative Services, Real 
Estate Division (RED), as is presently required by the 
City's Administrative Code. 

The Administrative Code states that the means of selling 
such surplus properties, such as by "public auction, 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Competitive Bidding Process or such other means of 
disposition" must be specified in a resolution approved by 
the Board of Supervisors. According to Mr. Charles 
Sullivan of the City Attorney's Office, the proposed 
ordinance would authorize the PUC to sell properties, 
considered to be surplus to the needs of the PUC, without 
selling such properties through a public auction or by a 
Competitive Bidding Process, or some other means of 
disposition in "as is" condition. Mr. Dowd reports that if 
allowed to negotiate directly with developers and if such 
developers obtained the needed entitlements, the PUC 
would most likely be able to sell the surplus property at a 
substantially greater price than having the RED sell 
properties in their "as is" condition as described in 
Attachment. The Budget Analyst notes however, that the 
Administrative Code does not require that surplus 
property be sold in its "as is" condition. According to Mr. 
Sullivan however, selling such properties in "as is" 
condition is the usual practice when surplus property is 
sold by the RED. 

According to Mr. Dowd, the PUC is currently preparing a 
Request For Proposal (RFP) process in order to enter into 
exclusive negotiations with developers for three 
properties: 7.5 acres of vacant land in Fremont (known as 
the Niles Reservoir property), 8.7 acres of vacant land in 
South San Francisco (known as the South City El 
Camino/ Chestnut property), and 6.4 acres leased to a 
nursery in Mountain View (known as the Mountain View/ 
Whisman and Tyrella property). Both the Fremont and 
South San Francisco properties are currently open vacant 
space, and the Mountain View Property includes a 
nursery that leases property from the PUC with an 
annual rental of $12,600. 

According to Mr. Dowd, these three properties have not 
formally been declared as surplus bj^ the PUC because 
such a declaration would require the PUC to immediately 
turn over the subject properties to RED for sale to the 
highest bidder, most likely by public auction or through a 
Competitive Bidding Process. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Mr. Dowd reports that the total value of the three 
properties with entitlements, which would allow for 
residential and commercial development, is estimated to 
be between $15 and $20 million, which is significantly 
greater than the estimated value of the properties without 
entitlements of approximately $5,000,000 to 6,700,000, as 
discussed in Attachment. According to Mr. Dowd, there 
are hundreds of potential developers who will be notified 
by the PUC pertaining to the potential sale of these three 
PUC properties. 

According to the proposed ordinance, the PUC would be 
authorized to sell surplus properties at negotiated prices 
with developers if the PUC finds that: 

(1) a property is not needed for utility purposes, (2) 
the property has potential for a net sales price 
greater than an "as is" sales price or current rental 
value if the property can be rezoned, subdivided, or 
otherwise entitled to its highest and best use, (3) 
the SFPUC should have continued involvement and 
oversight in the entitlement and sale process for 
the property, and (4), the proceeds of such sales can 
be most effectively utilized for utility purposes. 

Each specific PUC property that is sold would be subject 
to final approval by the Board of Supervisors under 
separate future legislation. In that regard, the proposed 
ordinance states: 

The terms and conditions of any agreement to sell a 
property, including but not limited to the purchase 
price, shall be subject to the review and approval of 
the Board of Supervisors, in its sole and absolute 
discretion, in accordance with Charter Section 
9.118(c). 

Therefore, according to Mr. Sullivan, the proposed 
ordinance requires that the PUC must obtain Board of 
Supervisors approval, by resolution, for each individual 
property to be sold under the provisions of this proposed 
ordinance. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

5 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Additionally, according to the proposed ordinance, on or 
before the first anniversary of this ordinance, and each 
year thereafter, the PUC General Manager shall submit a 
resolution to the Board of Supervisors to request Board of 
Supervisors approval, by resolution, of the continuation of 
this proposed ordinance, and to provide a status report on 
the PUC properties for which RFPs have been previously 
issued. 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for 

the Board of Supervisors. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

10 



Attachment j 
Page 1 of 3 



DATE: March 10, 2004 

TO: Budget Analyst 

FROM: Garrett M. Dowd, Director, SFPUC Real Estate Services 

RE: File 04-0100 SFPUC Process For Sale of Real Property 



The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission ("SFPUC") owns approximately 63,000 
acres of watershed lands, more than 200 miles of water pipeline right-of-way land, 160 miles of 
electrical transmission lines, 900 miles of sewer lines, and numerous other facilities such as in- 
city reservoirs, tank sites, and pump stations. These land holdings are located in San Francisco, 
San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin Counties. Some of 
these lands have the potential to be used by third parties through the use of lease agreements. For 
example the surface areas of underground pipelines can be used for parking lots while golf 
courses, quarries, and even cellular telephone sites, etc. exist on watershed lands, provided the 
use is compatible with SFPUC system operations. There also are parcels that are entirely surplus 
to the SFPUC's operations, and thus are candidates for an outright sale. 

These surplus lands offer opportunity for much-needed additional SFPUC revenues. 
Capital demands associated with the reconstruction of the Hetch Hetchy water system have made 
increasing such revenues a priority. Many of these surplus properties have potential values 
substantially greater than an "as is" value, if the properties can be rezoned, subdivided, or 
otherwise entitled to their highest and best use. 

As currently drafted, the City's surplus property ordinance only contemplates the 
disposition of surplus property via "as is" sale, with such sales to be conducted by the Real 
Estate Division. The proposed legislation allows the SFPUC to enter into exclusive negotiating 
agreements under which successful developers would seek to obtain entitlements for certain of 
the surplus properties, leading to the eventual purchase by the developers at significantly higher 
prices than from "as is" sales. The final purchase and sale agreement for each property would be 
subject to SFPUC and Board of Supervisors' approval 

At the current time, the SFPUC is beginning the RFQ/P process leading to the selection 
of successful developers and exclusive negotiating agreements for three properties: Fremont (7.5 
acre former Niles Reservoir property); South San Francisco (8.7 acre El Camino/ 
Chestnut/Mission property); and Mountain View (6.4 acres between Whisman and Tyrella). 



008884 000 1V700430 1 



Attachment I 

Page 2 of 3 

The Fremont and South San Francisco properties are currently open space and the Mountain 
View property currently contains a nursery. The total value of the three properties with 
entitlements is estimated to be between SI 5 million and S20 million. Such value is significantly 
more than the current "as is" value of the three properties. SFPUC expects to develop and sell 
additional properties using this process. While it is very difficult to estimate exactly what 
someone might pay for the properties "as is", I believe a good rule of thumb is approximately 1/3 
the entitled price (or, in this case between S5 and S6.7 million). This estimate is based on the past 
experiences such as the sale of the Bemal property in 1998. The highest price we were offered 
prior to entitlements was S50 million, ultimately the property sold for SI 33 million when 
entitled. 

In order to generate the greatest revenue for the City, the SFPUC will follow standard 
procedure utilized in typical RFQ/P releases. A qualified review panel will evaluate each 
proposal to determine the best applicant. Proposals will ranked based on total purchase price as 
well as qualifications and experience. The developers have been asked to submit a proforma on 
each surplus property outlining what they believe can realistically be developed on the sites. 
Through this process developers will determine a residual land value, which will be paid to the 
SFPUC. 

If I can provide any further details please feel free to contact me at 487-521 1 . 



0O8884 0001 700430 1 1 2 



Potential PUC Surplus Properties 



Attachment I 
Page 3 of 3 



Description 



Location 



7.5 acres of vacant land 


Fremont location (known as the Niles 
Reservoir property), SFPUC parcel No. 50 


8.7 acres of vacant land 


South San Francisco (known as the South 

City El Camino/ Chestnut property), 

SFPUC Parcel Nos. 21 and 24, San Mateo 

County Lands and MUNI Parcel No. 5 


6.4 acres, leased to a nursery 


Mountain View (known as the Mountain 
View/ Whisman and Tyrella property), 
portion of SFPUC Parcel Nos. 189 and 
190, Bay Division Pipeline No 3 and 4. 



13 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Item 6 - File 04-0239 

Department: 

Item: 



Description: 



Department of Human Resources (DHR) 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of 
provisional appointments of employees in classifications 
0922 Manager 1, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 
0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 
0942 Manager VII, 0943 Manager VIII, 1237 Training 
Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management 
Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission on Status of 
Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 
Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 Planner 2, 5283 
Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 
7334 Stationary Engineer, and 9343 Roofer, and H-30 
Captain (Fire Department). 

The proposed resolution would approve the extension of 
provisional appointments through June 30, 2005 for 
employees in 22 classifications for which no eligible list 
exists and who have been employed in their classes for 
more than three years, as required by San Francisco 
Charter Section 10.105. 

According to Ms. Marsha Stroope of DHR, provisional 
appointments of City employees occur when there is not 
an eligible list available for appointment to permanent 
City positions. An eligible list includes all persons who 
passed a civil service examination given bj r the 
Department of Human Resources or a Human Resources 
unit within another city department for the specific 
classification. According to Charter Section 10.105, 
provisional appointments of City employees to classified 
positions, for which no eligible list exists, cannot exceed 
three years, unless such appointments are renewed with 
the approval of the Board of Supervisors and upon 
certification by the Human Resources Director that for 
reasons beyond her control, the DHR has been unable to 
conduct examinations for these positions. The Attachment 
to this report is a memorandum provided by Ms. Stroope 
which lists the 22 classifications, the number of affected 
employees in each classification totaling 145, the date 
that the last civil service examination was held for each of 
the 22 classifications and the reasons why civil service 
examinations have not been held. 



14 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

The proposed resolution would approve an extension of 
provisional appointments for the applicable 22 
classifications, affecting a total of 145 employees through 
June 30, 2005. These employees work in 25 City 
Departments, including the Airport, the Public Utilities 
Commission, the Planning Department and the Fire 
Department. 

Comments: 1. According to Ms. Stroope, DHR has undertaken an 

expedited program to reduce the number of long-term 
provisional employees in the City by streamlining the 
examination process, decentralizing examination 
functions into various City departments (such as the 
Airport, Health Department and Sheriff), providing more 
examinations and increasing the number of eligible lists 
for appointment of employees to permanent positions. As 
a result, Ms. Stroope reports that DHR has reduced the 
number of provisional employees from 3,193 employees in 
1999 to the current number of 1035 such employees in 
2004. Of these provisional appointments, the long-term 
provisional appointments were 54 in 1999 and are 145 
currently, an increase of 91 long-term provisional 
appointments, or an increase of 169 percent. 

2. Ms. Stroope reports that if the proposed resolution is 
not approved by the Board of Supervisors, then the 145 
affected employees would need to be laid off since their 
provisional appointments would have exceeded the three- 
year limit, in accordance with Charter Section 10.105. Ms. 
Linda Ross of the City Attorney's Office concurs with Ms. 
Stroope. 

3. According to Ms. Stroope, the DHR will not be able to 
hold the necessary civil service examinations and create 
the applicable eligible lists for these 145 provisional 
employees in 22 classifications in order for such 
employees to be appointed to permanent positions, prior 
to the three year deadline for these 145 provisional 
employees and is therefore requesting approval from the 
Board of Supervisors to extend these provisional 
appointments through June 30, 2005, when it is 
anticipated that the applicable civil service examinations 
would have been held and that the eligible lists will exist 
for appointment to permanent positions. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

15 



Memo to the Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



4. As of the writing of this report, Ms. Stroope could not 
provide an estimate of when the civil service 
examinations for these 22 classifications would be given. 
However, Ms. Stroope states that all of the examinations 
and eligible lists for these 145 employees are planned to 
be completed by May 30, 2005. Therefore, according to 
Ms. Stroope DHR will not be requesting approval from the 
Board of Supervisors for any further extensions of these 
provisional appointments beyond the requested extension 
date of June 30, 2005. 

5. Ms. Stroope notes that, if the proposed resolution is not 
approved, and these 145 provisional employees were 
terminated, their budgeted positions would still be 
included in each departments' budgets. Ms. Stroope states 
that this would result in each of the affected departments 
having to recruit, hire and train new employees to fill the 
same budgeted positions, if such positions continue to be 
approved by the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors in 
the Citv's budget. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed resolution. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

16 



hhOJn ■ LLSr-dTLUilC-ricLni iun 



HUMRN {age o? 2 

R€SOWRC€S 

OIV S COUNTV Of ■■ 5WJ PFWNCISCO 

Andrea R. Gourdine, Humon Resources Director 

MEMORANDUM 



Date: March 25, 2004 

To: Elaine Forbes 
Budget Analyst 



From: Marsha Stroope 
Deputy Director 
Department' of Human Resources 

Subject: Resolution Approving Extension of Provisional Appointments-File 04-0239 

The attached chart provides the information requested by the Budget Analyst regarding 
the classifications included in the above mentioned request for extension of provisional 
appointments. 

The Department of Human Resources (DHR) is unable to conduct examinations and 
establish eligible lists prior to the 3-year Charter mandated time limit for provisional 
employment in these classifications for the following reasons: 

1. DHR Merit System Services Division staff has been reduced as a result of budget 
reductions over the past two years. 

2. Competitive, ranked examination processes are required for all tested classifications. 

3. The H-30 Captain (Fire Department) examination has been delayed due to the 
deliberations related to Civil Service Commission Rules on Fire Department 
examinatiefts/certiflcation process and approval of secondary criteria. 

4. The Management Classification and Compensation Plan audit results must be finalized 
before examinations can be conducted for the new Manager series. While all positions 
have been audited, appeals must be resolved before final allocations and examinations 
can be completed. 

Release of these long-term provisional employees would result in loss of talent and 
experience in the City service, as the most senior provisional employees would be laid 
off, while the less senior would be retained. Since the position authority would remain, 
departments would then have to recruit, hire and train new employees to fill the same 
budgeted positions at a substantial cost to the City and County. 



44 Gough Street. Son rronclsco. CR 941 05-1 255 - 17 

MflR-25-2004 17:33 415 557 4319 9B3 P-0: 



FROM : CC5F_EHPLUYtb_K=LH I 1 UNb 



n-rjN= mj. 



ti3 33 f ^^±: 



^3 ^tjkj*-f CJC 



Attachment 
Page 2 of 2 



w (a 






• s 
- 3 



CTi — 



5 8 



8 Q 



8 Q 



TJ 33 

c m 
o o 
o > 

n-: 



n o 

Is 



CO X 



8Q 



S.S 



F 2 

=T2 



o S 



SQ 



££ 



Crt > 

P 

< -n 



5=' 



8. 2 



o .;; 
5\:' 
S 



»:; 

-t;.;-.i 

fip-' ■■'■■-' 

:■■: : 

Si:;'.': 
g-; 



3^ 



■3v2 
■9: v 

£'•'-■" 

$■;•:■: 



f..."' ■■ 

5- ■■-. 

3"' .•;'-. 



Si 










33 :■'.; 
.t> ■■:»:'■ 

2." : ' 



?'/,' 



23' 






18 



MOR-25-20B4 17=33 



415 55? 4313 



98;: 



P. 02 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 7 - File 04-0272 

Note: The Mayor's Budget Office advises that an Amendment of the Whole will be 
introduced at the Finance and Audits Committee meeting on March 31, 2004 
to correct the number of positions being deleted, stating that 187.40 FTE 
positions will be deleted instead of 189.90 FTE positions as contained in the 
original ordinance. This report is based on the forthcoming Amendment of 
the Whole. 



Departments: 



Administrative Services (ADM) 

Adult Probation (ADP) 

Adult and Aging Services (AGE) 

Airport 

Assessor/Recorder (ASR) 

Convention Facilities (CFM) 

Emergency Communications (ECD) 

Environment (ENV) 

Human Resources (HRD) 

Juvenile Probation (JUV) 

Municipal Transportation Authority (MTA) 

Police 

Public Health (DPH) 

Recreation and Park (REC) 

Sheriff 

Telecommunications and Information Services (DTIS) 



Item: 



Ordinance amending the FY 2003-2004 Annual Salary 
Ordinance, reflecting the deletion of 187.40 FTE positions 
in the following 16 departments: Administrative Services, 



.r-vu-Uit Probe 



and Aging Services, Airport, 



Assessor/Recorder, Convention Facilities, Emergency 
Communications, Environment, Human Resources, 
Juvenile Probation, Municipal Transportation Authority, 
Police, Public Health, Recreation and Park, Sheriff, and 
Telecommunications and Information Services. 



Description: 



As shown in Attachments I and II, provided by the 
Mayor's Budget Office, the proposed amendment to the 
Annual Salary Ordinance for FY 2003-2004 (Ordinance 
No. 195-03) would delete, on an annualized basis, 42.98 
FTE funded positions and 144.42 FTE vacant unfunded 
positions (due to required attrition savings), for a total of 
187.40 FTE positions in the 16 departments listed above. 



Board of Supervisors 

Budget Analyst 

19 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31. 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



Since 9.48 FTE funded positions are not currently filled, 
the deletion of 42.98 FTE funded positions will result in 
the layoff of 33.50 FTE employees. The layoffs in two 
departments, ADP and JUV, will be effective on April 1, 
2004. The layoffs in the other departments will be 
effective commencing between April 23 and Maj 7 31, 
2004. : According to Mr. Julian Low of the Mayor's 
Budget Office, it is probable that some or all of the 
employees to be laid off will have bumping rights. 
However, Mr. Low is unable to provide details on this 
matter prior to the actual layoffs occurring. 



Proposed Savings: 



According to Mr. Low, the proposed ordinance would 
result in the following estimated maximum reduced 
annual costs to the City by deleting the salaries of the 
42.98 FTE funded positions (both filled and vacant): 





Maximum Salary (Excluding 




Mandatory Fringe Benefits) 


FY 2003-2004 




General Fund 


$854,297 


Non-General Funds 2 


269.672 


Total - All Funds 


$1,123,969 


FY 2004-2005 




General Fund 


$2,775,331 


Non-General Funds 


766.004 


Total - All Funds 


$3,541,335 



Adding an estimated average 22.0 percent for mandatory 
fringe benefits would result in additional savings of: 

• $247,273, for total savings of up to $1,371,242 in FY 
2003-2004, including total General Fund savings of up 
to $1,042,242. 



1 Mr. Low advises that while the layoff notices are effective on April 23, 2004, consideration of early 
retirement options may delay the date as to when some of the layoffs actually occur. 

2 The non-General Fund departments are the Airport and CFM. 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

20 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



• $779,094, for total savings of up to $4,320,429 in FY 
2004-2005, including total General Fund savings of up 
to $3,385,904. 

Commsntsi 1. The most significant reductions m filled positions m 

General Fund departments will occur in the ADP, JUV, 
DPH, and REC budgets, as described in Comments Nos. 2 
- 5 below. 

2. Attachment III, provided by Mr. Daniel Lee of ADP, 
explains that ADP is laying off five employees effective 
April 1, 2004 (1.25 FTEs in FY 2003-2004). According to 
Mr. Low, this would result in a FY 2003-2004 General 
Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory fringe benefits, of 
up to $66,967 and a FY 2004-2005 General Fund savings, 
exclusive of mandatory fringe benefits, of up to $268,944. 

3. Attachment IV, provided by Ms. Gwendolyn Tucker of 
JUV, explains that JUV is laying off six employees 
effective April 1, 2004 (1.50 FTEs in FY 2003-2004). 
According to Mr. Low, this would result in a FY 2003- 
2004 General Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory fringe 
benefits, of up to $82,679 and a FY 2004-2005 General 
Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory fringe benefits, of 
up to $332,046. 

4. Attachment V, provided by Mr. Gregg Sass of DPH, 
explains that the proposed ordinance would require DPH 
to lay off nine employees (0.74 FTEs in FY 2003-2004). 
According to Mr. Low, the deletion of all funded positions 
in DPH, both filled and vacant, would result in a FY 2003- 
2004 General Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory fringe 
benefits, of up to $408,593 and a FY 2004-2005 General 
Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory fringe benefits, of 
up to $1,039,563. Mr. Sass states that, as a result of 
these lay offs, "The remaining workforce will be required 
to work harder." 

5. Attachment VI, provided by Mr. Michael Frank of 
REC, explains that the proposed ordinance would require 
REC to lay off a net of seven middle management 
employees (0.98 FTEs in FY 2003-2004) in line with 



Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

21 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



REC's current restructuring. 3 According to Mr. Low, the 
deletion ofseven fundedand filled positions in RE C would 
result in a FY 2003-2004 General Fund savings, exclusive 
of mandatory fringe benefits, of up to $102,745 and a FY 
2004-2005 General Fund savings, exclusive of mandatory 
fringe benefits, of up to $552,392. 

6. Approval of the proposed ordinance would result in 
requests for early retirement in accordance with the 
Charter Section A8401 which was approved by voters on 
November 4, 2003 (Proposition F) to grant early 
retirement benefits as mitigation for layoffs. Under that 
Charter Amendment, City employees working in 
classifications from which staff are being laid off during 
FY 2003-2004 and FY 2004-2005, due to the City's budget 
constraints, are eligible to take early retirement. 
Employees who are granted early retirement are treated 
as if the}' had worked three years longer and were three 
years older for the purposes of determining their monthly 
retirement payments from the City. This allows some 
employees to retire who are not currently eligible, and it 
increases the retirement pay of employees who are 
already eligible to retire. The City offers early retirement 
to permanent employees based on seniority, and only if 
early retirement by an individual employee would prevent 
another employee from losing his or her position with the 
City. According to Mr. Jamie Austen of HRD, the cost to 
the City for any early retirements has not yet been 
determined. 



Recommendation: Approve the proposed ordinance. 



3 One of the 12 positions to be laid off, the Classification 3285 Junior Museum Director (the Randall 
Museum Director position) would be funded in the future by the Friends of the Randall Museum, 
according to Mr. Frank. 

Board of Supervisors 
Budget Analyst 

22 



Page 1 of 2 





























































-r 










— 






^ 


-r 


-T 










-r 


























































«* 


r 


>* 








zz 









c 


= 










D 




o 






















































= 


= 


z 








m 






n 


m 




































































r- 


^1 


r-'- 








nj 
















































































































_ 
























































-f 
















-r 




-f 










* 




- 




















































C2 


r 


a 








23 






cs 


pq 


=3 










ZZ 


























































3 





z 








z 






C 





z 










z 




> 






















































U 


_ 


j 








u 






O 


'_ 


u 










U 












<» 


rg 


a 


o 


zz 


te 




r , 


-r 


<et 


t 


c 


-t 




= 








-T 


T 




^, 


T 


c 





tr, 




c~ 


S\ 










_ 


-r 


•ZZ 


fl 


_ 


r4 
















O 


en 


o 




o 


TT 




ZZ 




w 


o 


-r 


-r 




0" 










1*1 






O 








-r 






trj 




r- 










C 




> 




a 


y 










O 


o 


^ 


(~J 


~ 


S 




tn 


a- 


m 


rn 


^ 


o- 




»_ 








F "J 


— 




05 


^i 


''l 


^i 


a 




c*2 


rn 




m 


f*l 


r- 


c; 


r^ 


^. 


— 


^ 




"3 
E 

S 


















r*l 






















=' 














0" 









a; 






tr' 






~ 






r-' 


c 


-r 






Sj 










a- 






« 




m 




-T 






■o 




c 




C: 








c- 


r- 








-1- 




9t 










r- 










c 








a 




















m 














r ' 




e 














"" 


— 


~ 


— 


tr, 




— 


"" 






















a 
O 












b^ 










if. 














n 




■Si 








bV3 


» 




Vi 








b^ 




!y ; 


s« 




K 
























































































































o 


O 


o 










-r 


-r 


c 














-f 








-r 


X 


c 






cr 






O 









-c 






«* 




a 


>, 










o 


tn 


o 




o 






o 


h- 


c 


c 


"T 














m 








z. 




c 






















c 


-t 






n 














o 


-a 












o* 


























°\ 


















m 




r- 


c- 














sd 
























r- 




























Z* 






^' 












c~ 









r~- 


= 




















-T 






"T 








T 






kO 


























~T 








r-- 






r- 


f~ 






r^ 


^ 


c 







■o 


t: 
























































































s 












b"- 3 




































H 


















yt- 


























































































































^ 


o 


rj 


O 


o 






^ 


o\ 


-T 


-r 


O 














r , 






O 


-T 


"* 









r^ 






__ 


_ 


M 


ia- 


m 


N 


_ 


^ 


















a- 


m 


ZZ 


o 








o> 




















r- 
























-t 

































o 




o 


o 








C* 


O 




0> 














VO 






— _ 


O; 


^_ 


















zz 






O 1 


^ 








































rj 






















to 




-r 


>d 






d 










m 




CS 























to 


p. 


p. 


o 


o 






O 


a 


^ 


- 


.^ 














ON 






T 


^ 


50 


-T 






- 






r . 


rl 


r , 


r4 


^ 


x 


- 


0t 
















~ 


IS 


t 


m 


s 






zz 


% 


O 


- 


c 














o> 






i^ 


z 
^z r 




-t 






^ 









zz 


in 


1-* 


"* 


- 


tN 


tO 


























































■*" 




m 


-f 


















-r 






m 


















o 


o 


o 


a: 


c; 


s 




ZZ 


zz 


— 


— 


c; 


s 




— 








o 


= 







- 


c; 


zz 


a; 







a> 







zz 


= 


m 


= 


= 


r 


zz 
















o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


e 




3 


zz 


o 


o 


O 


e 




= 








3 


o 













zz 


as 




q 


a: 




O 

















<r. 




uz 


B 




















si 








































-r 
























O 


zz 




H 


a 







































~ 


















































to 




























































































































g 


























































































o 




















































































































































































- 


























































































■a 




















































































































































































a 










"> 


















J 












































B 


























































































a 


























= 


c^ 




























































- 


'^ 


















g 








G 








. 








S 


'p 








t 


- 


z 










H 


















._ 


z. 
5 


i: 
a 

- 












^ 






a 




v. 

z 







> 
n 








z 








a 


to 

a 
a 








5 


| 


-z 
z 
z 

_ 
E 

C 




Ci 


















E. 

— 


< 
g 

5; 
2 


< 

i 

- 


o 


> 
5 

o 


'a 
a 




a- 
U 


c 



o 

Q 




^ 


^3 

a 
c 

< 


— 

a 

■a 
< 




£1 
- 




- 

a 




U 

s 
< 

< 


1 

■a 
< 






f 


1 


5 
> 

a 
c 

C 


c 
5 


a 

a 

< 




a 
5 


a 

> 
a 
a 
U 




a 


a 
c 


z 
B 

E 


J-. 

z: 

zz 


z 

> 

E 
a 


a 

a 
Z 

G 

C 


















a 


3 
a 

=3 




< 


a 

a 


- 




5 


1 


y: 


c 


o 
V. 


e 
s 








< 
z 

< 




e 
Jc 
a 
EC 




a 
p. 

Q 





< 


> 

c 


a 
a 




5 


e 

a 

OS 




< 


< 


3 


a 


a 
c 


3 


I 












V. 




































z 














































<« 










zz 


© 


-^ 


rl 


<^- 






to 


IN 


c 


c 


^! 












m 






to 


_ 


„ 


ir 






r- 






C 





to 


r"J 


r^ 


rj 


O 


•^, 
















-t- 




rr 


rj 








ri 


-r 
















ir 








T 


-r 








O 










» 


fr 


t> 






m 












> 








tc 


a- 








-r 


f 


■<d- 


-T 


VO 










< 




^r 






0" 


^ 


Ot 


ON 












O 











t 


r-" 






U 


















r- 




























rr 









zz 


r 


z: 




































< 




































Pi 






















































_< 




































C 






















































e 




































L% 






















































Be 




































> 






















































E 




































2i 






















-^ 
































■j-i 




































u. 






















































'S 




c 




a 


= 


a 
























p. 






















































> 




a 


a 


c 


z 


a 






a 


_ 


^ 


c 


^ 










_ 




■s. 


















7^ 
































_ 


















c 


C 




3 


z 
































































-O 


JZ 


_c 


ZZ 


X 
























a 














































c 

1 








y. 




C 


e 


C 


c 


a 












































c 






























H 




£1 


£ 


a. 


£1 


PL, 






zz 
- 


c 


C 


-i 


X 
-- 










Be 


























3 





























— 


u 


J^ 


j^ 


.22 












— 












c 




XT 






„ 


















— 














— 




OS 

c 

C 








> 

pe 
- 




| 


t 






j 






•a 


< 


- 
< 


\< 


- 

* 














\ 






z 
p 

< 


c 
c 

5 


z 
i 


c 

'1 






z 

c 






zz 


5 


^ 


zz 

z 




I 


X 





23 



Atta chment l 
Page 2 of 2 



n 

o 

Q- 

■c 
s 
■c 









-T 
































-T 














-r 






— 






~ 


-r 


t 


















— 






d 


























— 














~ 






= 






c: 


C 


o 








































































































-. 


























Tl 




















~. 






*1 


n 


"-. 












9 






















































































-r 






** 








































-r 






-f 






■* 


-t 


















X 






pa 


























X 














X 






X 






no 


X 


DO 


















Q 






z 


























Z 














C 






3 






z 


-' 


~ 


















w 






u 


























u 














U 






'_ 






w> 


U 


- 










m 


« 


3C 




^ 


i^ 




f"- 


e- 




c* 


cr 


x 




— 


c 


w 


r*l 


m 


m 


c 


«-< 




_ 








-r 


^ 


E3 


m 


c 


o 


o 


m 


N 


""I 




IT, 










c: 


= 






x 








in 
















-r 


c- 




^ 










•O 


^r 








-r 


^ 


<t 


r~- 




3C 




m 




X 




t^ 


l-j 




^c 


oc 








e 




o_ 


c 


o 




—_ 


= 




t*l 




w 








■st 








f* 




-T 






rn 




o 




in 


a 


ir* 




o\ 


e- 










t' 


■ef 


a-' 








r* 


r- 






^r 






v=* 














en 


en 




en 






c^ 




fn 






a 




^: 


X 










"T 


^ 


X 
















£ 






O 








-T 










^ 












t^ 




^r 




T 






































LT, 




n 






























U", 






= 












































A 


































n 


3 

u 


M 




M 


M 




Efl 


3* 




89 




^: 




^r 














o^ 




W5 






























w 




« 




























































































f- 






0> 








= 












c; 














-r 




= 


~ 




o 


» 


m 














a 






= 






:c 


















f~ 


r- 




r^ 


-f 
















c 


— 




r- 




-r 


o 














■a 


























kO 




c 


o 


o 


3 
















-r 






-T 










VO 


















-' 














■* 






3- 


~ 






r- 


r~ 


-T 






















r- 






r- 


r- 


r- 
















































^ 














-r 






-T 


o 


•o 


e** 




^ 


r- 










13 
















































































a 






Sfi 






b^ 






V3 








V» 


























































p. 






-r 






— 


3" 






fl 


- 


_ 


„ 


m 


tn 


c 














o 


~T 


C 


X 


C' 


m 


o 


-T 


r~ 


CJ> 


























t 


-r 


















0- 














t 




c 






o 




e> 




w 
















-5-. 






~_ 














"3- 


-r 


c 


a- 


c- 


^ 


T 














r- 


= 


o 






























r'' 






-r 














ro 












































rj 
















_,. 






x 






9 


o- 






J. 


-,. 


o 


e 


- 


o 


x 














c 


DO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


r , 


in 


O 


rs 
















C 






o 






-r 


2 






-r 


^r 




en 


" 


en 
















-r' 


A 


- 


EC 


- 


cr 


■St 


o 


O 


T 












<-. 




= 
O 






a 

a 


s 




a 


= 
o 


o 

B 




— 




a 






c 
= 


= 
= 


s 




m 




































Ed 


in 




— 


— 




— 


— 




— 


— 


r > 




— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


r~ 




M 








o 


O 


o 


o 


c 


O 


O 


o 


O 


m 




111 




CO 

°5 


H 




















































o 


o 


— 






o 




E3 




M 








H 




















































~ 






o 


~ 




m 




O 


o 




01 




TT 






















































































£ 




































B 






























H 
c 




< 










= 
























































H 














H 












































C 
- 




















'J- 
v. 
< 










o 

a. 




o 

H 


























































































= 
































j: 








S. 












H 




•— 
























a 
E 
= 
























E 
> 


c 





5 
> 




— 
O 




= 




C 
P 

Lu- 
ll' 














en 

> 
_ 
< 




> 

r- 

DO 
2 


> 


— 


_>^ 




m 






i= 


A 






> 






a 
| 
















D. 

a 
en 




en 




2 




— 
a 
■ 










s 


e4 


Z 

< 


< 

u 

w 

Li! 


< 

H 

UJ 
CS 
O 

LD 

en 

LD 


EL 
>- 


< 




E 
— 
< 








3 
3 




2 






a 










~B 




5 





c 


c 


c 


H 


5 

E 


" 




c 
'> 

c 
a 

- 

- 




> 




> 


> 


II] 
-J 

u 

>- 


ta 

LZ 

s 




> 
- 

- 

Q 


5 
- 
< 


2 


BE 




d 








— 

■ 

e 
2 




S 


H 

= 
5 




> 
a 
p 






■a 

c 

1 
E 


— 
1 


— 




5 
c/: 


> 


eS 


Ed 


"E. 


i2 


S 

^ 


o 
5 






- 




< 

5 
u 


< 
— 

DC 


O 

- 

z 
> 


5 

a 

- 
< 


> 
— 

u 
ua 


< 

eE 
■J-, 

Z 


> 

U 

LU 


u 

BJ 

c 

z 


I 
< 


c 




a 








9 






= 















a 


















= 








S 




ID 


w 


z 




X 


X 


LD 












y. 




'_ 


09 




Q 


y. 




U 


^ 


s 




< 


< 


£^ 


C 


EL 


EL 


eS 


■j-. 










V, 


cfl 


DS 


< 


ll: 


- 


ua 


C/3 


en 




^3 






















































a 


























a 






















































>< 


























r- 
























c 


- 






rn 

U 


r- 




















- 




-r 


e 


o 


o 




rj 


a 


o 


<e 


m 




























— 


— 






U 


o- 


o 


~ 


- 


yz 












-t 


-t 






nj 




-r 


»n 




















O 1 






ON 






-T- 


-r 








rl 


















^3- 


-r 


c- 










-r 


T 












u 






= 






a 






s 


— 






< 


< 


m 








" 










< 






















































































































E 










































C. 
















































































— 




























































A 


^: 


Ai 


-i; 




.Sa 










X 






































c 










































— 






































6 




















E. 


EL 


EL 


EL 


— 


— 


— 










B> 
































H 






J 






j 














H 


4J 


^ 


4 


4 


4 


« 










C 




£ 


£ 


£ 


■5 


s 


5 




-c: 




-5 














1 




















c 








c 


c 












u 










































E 














C 


c 


■5 


c 


2 














-r 










































^ 










































































^ 






c 




































- 
































e 
















































Z 


















































































X 




X 


X 




E: 


2 


E 


jz. 






















~ 






c 




























































a 






LI. 






— 






EL 


— 






— 


■1 




1^ 


— 


£ K 










— 




— 


£ 






^ 


— 


— 


£ 




C 











24 



Atta c hment 
T 



II 



of 3 



Page 



Vacant (Unfunded) Position Deletions. 



FTE Min. Salary Max. Salary 
Department Class Title J J 

Count 


Adult Probation 


1432 


Sr. Transcriptionist 


1.00 


1,658.00 


2,014.00 


Adult Probation 


8444 


Deputy Probation Officers 


4.00 


1,777.00 


2.743.00 


Aging and Adult 


8482 


Crime Prevention Worker 


5.00 


1,539.00 


1.867.00 


Aging and Adult 


8488 


Director, Crime Prevention Program 


1.00 


2,264.00 


2,752.00 


Assessor 


4220 


Personal Property Auditor 


1.00 


2,058.00 


2,502.00 


Assessor 


4222 


Sr Personal Property Auditor 


1.00 


2,383.00 


2,896.00 


Assessor 


4261 


Real Property Appraiser 


1.00 


2,058.00 


2,502.00 


Public Health 


1012 


IS TECHNICIAN - JOURNEY 


1.00 


1,736.00 


2,110.00 


Public Health 


1052 


IS BUS ANALYST 


1.00 


2,258.00 


2,841.00 


Public Health 


1053 


Sr IS Business Analyst 


1.00 


2,615.00 


3,289.00 


Public Health 


1053 


Sr IS Business Analyst 


1.00 


2,615.00 


3,289.00 


Public Health 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1,603.00 


Public Health 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1.323.00 


1,603.00 


Public Health 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1,603.00 


Public Health 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1,603.00 


Public Health 


1406 


Sr Clerk 


1.00 


1,372.00 


1,662.00 


Public Health 


1426 


SR CLK TYPIST 


0.50 


1,506.00 


1.827.00 


Public Health 


1823 


Sr Admin Analyst 


0.75 


2,442.00 


2,969.00 


Public Health 


2105 


Pt Svcs Find Tech 


1.00 


1,510.00 


1,831.00 


Public Health 


2110 


Med Record Clerk 


0.50 


1,558.00 


1.890.00 


Public Health 


2246 


ASST DIR 


1.00 


2,835.00 


3,446.00 


Public Health 


2312 


LIC VOC NURSE 


1.00 


1,840.00 


2,236.00 


Public Health 


2312 


LIC VOC NURSE 


0.25 


1,840.00 


2.236.00 


Public Health 


2320 


RN 


1.00 


2,637.00 


3,072.00 


Public Health 


2552 


DIR THERAPY SV 


0.20 


2,151.00 


2,614.00 


Public Health 


2604 


Food Svc Worker 


0.50 


1,200.00 


1,454.00 


Public Health 


2650 


Assistant Cook 


1.00 


1,288.00 


1,562.00 


Public Health 


2736 


Porter 


1.00 


1,381.00 


1,674.00 


Public Health 


2920 


Med Social Wrkr 


0.50 


2,269.00 


2,758.00 


Public Health 


3417 


Gardener 


1.00 


1,580.00 


1,918.00 


Public Health 


1064 


IS PRG ANL PRN 


0.80 


2,759.00 


3,470.00 


Public Health 


1204 


SR PRSNL CLERK 


1.00 


1,698.00 


2,063.00 


Public Health 


1424 


CLERK TYPIST 


1.00 


1,375.00 


1.666.00 


Public Health 


1426 


SR CLK TYPIST 


1.00 


1.506.00 


1,827.00 


Public Health 


1426 


SR CLK TYPIST 


0.50 


1,506.00 


1.827.00 


Public Health 


1426 


SR CLK TYPIST 


1.00 


1.506.00 


1.827.00 


Public Health 


1636 


HEALTH CARE BILLING CLERK II 


1.00 


1.736.00 


2.110.00 


Public Health 


2302 


NURSING ASSISTANT 


0.43 


1.710.00 


2,079.00 


Public Health 


2302 


NURSING ASSISTANT 


1.00 


1.710.00 


2.079.00 


Public Health 


2302 


NURSING ASSIST ANT+C45 


1.00 


1,710.00 


2.079.00 


Public Health 


2542 


SPEECH PATHOLOGIST 


1.00 


2.577.00 


3.289.00 


Public Health 


2586 


HEALTH WKR II 


0.50 


1,499.00 


1.818.00 


Public Health 


2587 


HEALTH WKR III 


0.20 


1.638.00 


1.990.00 


Public Health 


2587 


HEALTH WKR III 


0.5( 


1 .638.00 


1,990.00 



25 



Attachment II 
Page 1 ot 6 



FTE Min. Salary Max. Salary 
Department Class Title 

Count 


Public Health 


25S7 


HEALTH WKR III 


1.00 


1,638.00 


1,990.00 


Public Health 


2587 


HEALTH WKR III 


1.00 


1,638.00 


1,990.00 


Public Health 


2588 


HEALTH WORKER IV 


1.00 


1,914.00 


2,326.00 


Public Health 


2588 


HEALTH WORKER IV 


1.00 


1,914.00 


2,326.00 


Public Health 


2594 


EMP AST CNSLR 


0.25 


2,326.00 


2,827.00 


Public Health 


2738 


PORTER ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR 


1.00 


1,517.00 


1.840.00 


Public Health 


2738 


PORTER ASSISTANT SUPERVISOR 


1.00 


1,517.00 


1,840.00 


Public Health 


2770 


SENIOR LAUNDRY WORKER 


1.00 


1,342.00 


1,626.00 


Public Health 


2803 


EPIDEMIOLOGIST II 


0.04 


2,490.00 


3,027.00 


Public Health 


2803 


EPIDEMIOLOGIST H 


1.00 


2,490.00 


3,027.00 


Public Health 


2846 


NUTRITIONIST 


0.50 


2,269.00 


2,758.00 


Public Health 


2920 


MEDICAL SOCIAL WORKER 


0.50 


2,269.00 


2,758.00 


Public Health 


2931 


EMP AST CNSLR 


0.50 


2,269.00 


2,758.00 


Public Health 


6120 


ENVRN HLTH INS 


1.00 


2,607.00 


3,169.00 


Public Health 


6137 


AST IND HYGNST 


0.75 


2,161.00 


2,627.00 


Public Health 


7334 


STATIONARY ENGINEER 


1.00 


2,351.00 


2,351.00 


Public Health 


7334 


STATIONARY ENGINEER 


1.00 


2,351.00 


2,351.00 


Public Health 


7344 


CARPENTER 


1.00 


2,351.00 


2,351.00 


Public Health 


7355 


TRUCK DRIVER 


1.00 


1,886.00 


2,402.00 


Public Health 


9924 


JUNIOR CLERK 


0.50 


1,128.00 


1,128.00 


Public Health 


9924 


PSA-HLTHSRVCS 


0.50 


1,128.00 


1,128.00 


Human Resources 


1209 


Benefits Technician 


2.00 


1,554.00 


1,886.00 


Human Resources 


1232 


Training Officer 


1.00 


2,226.00 


2,706.00 


Juvenile Probation 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


0.75 


1,375.00 


1,666.00 


Juvenile Probation 


8142 


Public Defender Investigator 


1.00 


2,274.00 


2,764.00 


Juvenile Probation 


8340 


Assistant Director. Juvenile Hall 


1.00 


2,209.00 


2,685.00 


Juvenile Probation 


S444 


Probation Officers 


4.00 


1,777.00 


2,743.00 


MTA 


1202 


Personnel Clerk 


1.00 


1,470.00 


1,782.00 


MTA 


1241 


Personnel Analyst 


1.00 


1,784.00 


2,625.00 


MTA 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1,603.00 


MTA 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1,603.00 


MTA 


1404 


Clerk 


1.00 


1,323.00 


1.603.00 


MTA 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


1.00 


1,375.00 


1,666.00 


MTA 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


1.00 


1,375.00 


1,666.00 


MTA 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


1.00 


1.375.00 


1,666.00 


MTA 


1426 


Senior Clerk Typist 


1.00 


1,506.00 


1,827.00 


MTA 


1426 


Senior Clerk Typist 


1.00 


1,506.00 


1,827.00 


MTA 


1444 


Secretary I 


1.00 


1,436.00 


1,740.00 


MTA 


1446 


Secretary II 


1.00 


1,658.00 


2,014.00 


MTA 


1450 


Executive Secretary I 


1.00 


1,805.00 


2,194.00 


MTA 


1773 


Media Training Specialist 


1.00 


2,221.00 


2,700.00 


MTA 


1842 


Management Assistant 


1.00 


1,960.00 


2,383.00 


MTA 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


1.00 


2,314.00 


2,813.00 


MTA 


5211 


Senior Engineer 


1.00 


3,679.00 


4,471.00 


MTA 


5288 


Transit Planner II 


1.00 


2.161.00 


2,627.00 


MTA 


5364 


Civil Engineering Associate I 


2.00 


1,932.00 


2,348.00 



26 



H L LdUiniciu, 

Page 3 of 3 



FTE Min. Salary Max. Salary 
Department Class Title J J 

Count 


MTA 


5366 


Engineering Associate II 


1.00 


2,236.00 


2,719.00 


MTA 


9126 


Transit Traffic Checker 


1.00 


1,686.00 


2,048.00 


MTA 


9139 


Transit Supervisor 


5.00 


2,221.00 


2,700.00 


MTA 


9197 


Signal and Systems Engineer 


1.00 


4,342.00 


4,342.00 


MTA 


9704 


Employment & Training Specialist IE 


1.00 


2,038.00 


2,478.00 


MTA 


9910 


Public Service Trainee 


1.00 






MTA 


9910 


Public Service Trainee 


1.00 






MTA 


1022 


IS Admin Analyst - II 


1.00 


2,120.00 


2,577.00 


MTA 


1844 


Management Assistant 


1.00 


2,247.00 


2,732.00 


MTA 


1844 


Senior Manasement Assistant 


1.00 


2,247.00 


2,732.00 


MTA 


5302 


Survey Technician 


1.00 


1,787.00 


2,172.00 


MTA 


7332 


Maintenance Machinist 


3.00 


2,004.00 


2,435.00 


MTA 


0952 


Deputy Director 


1.00 


2,969.00 


3,979.00 


Sheriff 


1506 


Confidential Secretary 


1.00 


2,130.00 


2,589.00 


Sheriff 


8204 


Institutional Police Officer 


6.00 


1,796.00 


2,183.00 


Sheriff 


8205 


Institutional Police Sergeant 


3.00 


2,053.00 


2,496.00 


Sheriff 


8209 


Institutional Police Lieutenant 


1.00 


2,264.00 


2,752.00 


Sheriff 


8202 


Security Guard 


1.00 


1,270.00 


1,539.00 


Sheriff 


8204 


Institutional Police Officer 


1.00 


1,796.00 


2,183.00 


Sheriff 


8205 


Institutional Police Sergeant 


1.00 


2,053.00 


2,496.00 


Sheriff 


8304 


Deputy Sheriff 


15.00 


2,085.00 


2,559.00 


Sheriff 


8470 


Exec. Directory County Parole Comm. 


LOO 


3,035.00 


3,689.00 


DTIS 


1002 


IS Operator - Journey 


3.00 


1,488.00 


1,805.00 


DTIS 


1402 


Junior Clerk 


1.00 


1,217.00 


1,474.00 


DTIS 


1739 


Computer Operations Supervisor II 


1.00 


2,430.00 


2,953.00 



Total = 144.42 



27 



March 18,2004 



To: Julian Low 

Mayor's Budget Office 

From: Daniel Lee 

Adult Probation Department 

Subject: ASO Amendment 



The following details the impact of the mid-year lay-offs from the Adult Probation Department: 
1426 Senior Clerk Typist 

The position ensures that requests for pre-sentencing and other reports for the courts are properly tracked 
within the department. By statutes of the Penal Code, the courts cannot impose a sentence on an individual 
without a pre-sentencing report. Delays in the courts receiving these reports will result in continuance and 
the defendants be held in custody until the next court date. 

This position also prepares data workup sheets used by probation officers in their recommendation of 
sentencing decisions. The workup sheets contains information including description as the circumstances 
of the offense, background of the defendant, statements from victims and involved parties, an analysis of 
aggravating/mitigating factors in felony cases, recommendations to aid the courts in making sentencing 
decisions 

Elimination of this position will result in gaps when requests are made by the courts and timely submission 
of the reports. 

4322 Cashier III 

The department receives $1.2 millions in fees and restitutions. Elimination of this position will not only 
reduce the number of available personnel available for accepting fees and deposits, but also increase risks 
for managing funds received. Specific duties include: reconciliation of daily deposits, preparation of cash 
entries and restitution payments for victims via City's FAMIS accounting system. 

1632 Sr. Account Clerk 

This position serves as the payroll clerk and as a back-up cashier. Elimination of this position will result in 
having fewer staff available to handle cashiering duties. With this reduction, the department will have only 
two individuals available to handle payments. The department is contemplating the closure of the cashier 
office during the lunch hour. 

1446 Secretary II 

This position provides secretarial and clerical support to management. Elimination of this position will 
delay updates and revisions to existing policy and procedural manuals and reports for decision-making. 
This position was filled in response to a management audit by the Controller's Office in October 2000, 
which recommended the need for maintaining current policy and procedural manuals. 

1410 Chief Clerk 

This is a middle management position that oversees the typing pool and reception desk staff; and also 
coordinates training in the department. Elimination of this position will result in the department reverting 
to its previous organizational chart where these functions are performed by other staff. 



28 



rayc ± uu l. 



City and County of San Francisco SSSS^SES 

' * CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER 

Juvenile Probation Department 



March 22, 2004 

Harvey M. Rose 

Harvey M. Rose Accountancy Corporation 

1390 Market St #1025 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Dear Mr. Rose: 

As you might know, the Juvenile Probation Department has had severe staffing reductions 
throughout the department over the past several years due to the continuing poor fiscal 
condition of the City. For example, we have had a 60% reduction in our Finance and 
Accounting Division alone during the past three fiscal years. We have reduced this 
division from a total of 10 staff to 4 due to retirements, budget cuts, transfers, and lay offs. 

The following is the information you requested on the impacts of staff layoffs for Fiscal 
Year 2003-2004: 

1. 1426 Senior Clerk Typist (2) : These two positions were in our Probation Services 
Division and supported the work of our Probation Officers. Some of their key 
functions included typing and preparing various court reports, filing, photo copying, 
answering phone calls, scheduling meetings, and providing guidance and information to 
youths, parents, and families. Their duties were absorbed by probation officers and the 
remaining clerical staff. With the very recent installation of computers for probation 
officers, many of these clerical duties have now been automated allowing us to reduce 
clerical staffing with less of an impact than we would have previously experienced. 

2. 1840 Junior Management Assistant : This position provided support for TANF 
(Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) related financial transactions. These 
transactions included processing invoices and purchases of materials and supplies. 
These functions were absorbed by the remaining Finance and Accounting staff. 
Procedures were adjusted to help streamline the process and reduce the impact of the 
increased responsibilities on the remaining staff. Control, accuracy, and timeliness of 
these processes are impacted as staff have more duties to cover with the ongoing 
staffing reductions. 

3. 1844 Senior Management Assistant : This position provided oversight and supervision 
over the Purchasing function in the Finance and Accounting Division. Key functions of 
this position included supervision of the Purchasing staff and the Reception Desk staff, 
materials & supplies and service contract preparation, financial transaction approvals 
on FAMTS/ADPICS, and vehicle fleet management. These functions were primarily 
absorbed by the remaining Senior Storekeeper, Supervisor of Finance and Accounting, 
and the Director of Finance & Administration. Procedures were again adjusted to help 



(415)753-7800 375 Woodside Avenue San Francisco, CA 94127 

29 



streamline the processes and reduce the impact of the increased responsibilities on the 
remaining staff. Control, accuracy, and timeliness of these processes are impacted as 
staff have more duties to cover with the ongoing staffing reductions. 

4. 1932 Assistant Storekeeper : This position provided support in staffing our materials 
and supplies function in the Finance and Accounting Division. Key functions of this 
position included receiving and distribution of materials and supplies, preparing 
inventories of goods on hand, ordering supplies, assisting in recommending reorder 
points, and recommending specifications for supplies purchases. These functions were 
absorbed by the remaining Senior Storekeeper and Storekeeper. Procedures were again 
adjusted to help streamline the processes and reduce the impact of the increased 
responsibilities on the remaining staff. Control, accuracy, and timeliness of these 
processes are impacted as staff have more duties to cover with the ongoing staffing 
reductions. 

5. 7524 Institutional Utility Worker : This position provided custodial and facility 
maintenance services for the Youth Guidance Facility. Key functions of this position 
included cleaning and sanitizing the Juvenile Hall housing units, troubleshooting and 
repairing minor facility problems, changing light bulbs and fixtures, and moving 
furniture and other heavy objects. These functions were absorbed by the remaining 
Institutional Utility Workers as well as the Custodial staff. The cleaning and sanitizing 
of the Juvenile Hall housing units is not impacted as this is the top priority and is 
required by various Health and Safety codes as well as State Board of Corrections 
requirements. However, the custodians and remaining utility workers will have less 
time to clean and maintain other areas of Juvenile Hall and the Administration/Court 
offices which could have an impact on the health and safety of the staff and public that 
use the facility. 

Please contact me at your convenience if you need to discuss this or obtain additional 
information. 

Best regards, 




jcker 
"hief Probation Officer 

Cc: William M. Johnston- Assistant Chief Probation Officer 
Mark S. Lui-Director of Finance and Administration 



30 



City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Health 

Gregg Sass 
Chief Financial Officer 




Memorandum 

March 18, 2004 

To: Julian Low 

Mayor's Budget Office 

From: Gregg Sass 

Chief Financial Officer 
Department of Public Health 

Subject: ASO Amendment 

The ASO Amendment currently pending at the Board Of Supervisor's contains the reduction of 
61.65 FTEs (when corrected) from the FY 2003-04 budget for the Department of Public Health 
(Department). The reduction of the 61.65 FTEs resulted in layoff notices being issued to nine 
employees (8.5 FTEs) and one additional employee (1 FTE) was reassigned to another position 
within the Department. 

Of the total list of FTE's, 46.67 were vacant and unfunded positions. These were selected for 
reduction since they have not been filled for over one year in order for the Department to achieve 
the budgeted salary savings. The impact of the reduction of these positions on services is not 
significant. 

Of the remaining 14.98 FTEs, 5.23 are in the category of Supervisor and Manager Deletions and 
3.5 of those were filled. The remaining 9.75 are Administrative Deletions and 5 FTEs are filled. 

XXlCjUU UULibS \J± CHI tllV l-T.^O X X -Lji3 CXI ^ llUllillllJllULl . ^ U11U OUfjp^ll CXXXU tXX^ ^WHl lb t\_» 111CX1VW Lll^OV 

cuts without impacting service levels. Reduction of administrative and support staff will increase 
the workloads for the remaining staff and result in delays in completing work. The remaining 
workforce will be required to work harder. 

If additional information is required, please contact me at 554-2610. 



(415)554-2610 101 Grove Street, Room 308 31 San Francisco, CA 94102 



March 19, 2004 



To: Mayor's Budget Office 

From: Michael S. Frank 

Director of Administration and Finance 
Recreation and Park Department 

Re: ASO Amendment 



Overview 

Over the last year, the Department has been moving towards a new organizational structure. The operations' 
components of the Department will be structured around four geographic quadrants that have lines synonymous with 
Supervisorial districts. The middle management consolidation proposal is consistent with this reorganization. The 
proposal eliminates an entire layer of supervision in our neighborhood parks' sections and reduces eleven positions. 
First line supervisors on the park maintenance side and the recreation side would report directly to four Assistant 
Superintendents who are each assigned one quadrant of the City. The proposal increases accountability by having 
one person responsible and knowledgeable for a particular quadrant. This would include budget authority and 
responsibility, goal and performance setting, and addressing customer service issues. Lastly, the director position at 
the Randall Museum would also be eliminated and be funded by the Friends of Randall Museum. 

The proposal includes creating five Regional Park Managers (0922) for Golden Gate Park, Stem Grove, McLaren 
Park, Lake Merced, and Glen Park. These positions would be newly defined and have integrated responsibility for 
recreational programs and park maintenance as well as coordinating concessions and capital projects in those 
regional parks. In addition, these positions would be able to maximize resources by coordinating and increasing 
volunteer resources and grant and fundraising opportunities. 

The savings generated by this proposal are $755,100 In FY 04/05. 

Mid-Year FY 03/04 $156,000 savings for two months (Assumes notices issued Feb. 23) 

• Eliminate 3 FTE 3464 Area Supervisor positions (2 layoffs and 1 recent retirement) 

• Eliminate 6 FTE 3291 Principle Recreation Supervisor positions (6 layoffs) 

• Eliminate 1 FTE 3285 Randall Museum Director (1 layoff) 

FY 04/05 $755.100 annual savings 

• Annual savings from mid-year reductions 

• Eliminate 1 FTE 1822 Management Assistant position (1 layoff at Randall Museum eff. 9/1/04) 

• Eliminate 1 FTE 3464 Area Supervisor position (1 layoff eff. 9/1/04) 

• Substitute 5 FTE 0922 Manager I positions (Positions assumed filled 9/1/04 and one funded by PUC for Lake 
Merced Regional Park.) 



3/24/2004 

1 



32 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 8 - File 04-0037 

Note: This item was continued by the Finance and Audits Committee at its meeting 
of March 24, 2004. Mr. Gary Dowd of the PUC and Mr. Steve Legnitto of the 
RED were requested to report back to the Finance and Audits Committee 
concerning various issues at (a) 424 Mason Street, including its potential sale 
and (b) 875 Stevenson Street. Mr. Legnitto was also requested by the 
Committee to explore lease site alternatives to the proposed 1145 Market 
Street facility. 



Department: 



Public Utilities Commission (PUC) 
Department of Administrative Services, 
Division (RED) 



Real Estate 



Item: 



Location of the 
Proposed Lease: 



Resolution authorizing a new lease of 30,790 square feet of 
office space in a building located at 1145 Market Street, 
San Francisco for the City and County of San Francisco 
Public Utilities Commission. 

The entire first, eighth, and tenth floors, and a portion of 
the fourth floor of the 12-story office building located at 
1145 Market Street. 



Lessor: 



The Sangiacomo Family Trust, Angelo Sangiacomo and 
Yvonne Sangiacomo, Co-Trustees 



Lessee: 

Rentable 
Square Footage: 



City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through 
the PUC 

30,790 rentable square feet 



Amount: 
Source of Funds: 



Rent Payable 
by the PUC 
to the Sangiacomo 
Family Trust: 



$2,385,471 

$221,734 from the PUC's FY 2003-2004 budget and 
$2,163,737 from the $16,719,301 pending supplemental 
appropriation request under (File No. 04-0094) of the 
Budget Analyst's March 24, 2004 report to the Finance and 
Audits Committee. 

$64,145.83 monthly (approximately $2.08 per square foot 
per month), or $769,750 annually ($25.00 per square foot). 
The rent would remain the same during the entire term of 
the four-year lease, and there would neither be any 
Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments nor any operating 
expense pass-throughs. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

33 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Term of the 
Proposed Lease: 



Four years, commencing upon the substantial completion of 
the leasehold improvements by the lessor. According to Mr. 
Jerry Romani of the Real Estate Division (RED), the 
estimated commencement date of the subject lease is May 
1, 2004. 



Option to Renew: Two five-year options (see Comment No. 9) 
Utilities and Janitor 



Services: 

Leasehold 
Improvements: 



Description: 



To be provided by lessor. 



The proposed lease requires that the lessor complete the 
leasehold improvements prior to commencement of the 
lease at a total maximum cost of $1,094,008, of which 
$369,480 would be paid for by the lessor and a maximum of 
up to $724,528 would be funded by the PUC (see Comment 
Nos. 4 and 5). Attachment I, provided by Mr. Romani, 
contains a budget, source of funds, and scope of work for the 
leasehold improvements under the proposed lease. 
According to Mr. Romani, construction work is expected to 
begin in March of 2004 and be completed by May 1, 2004, 
at which time the subject lease would commence. 

The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is currently leasing 
approximately 140,000 rentable square feet of space for 
administrative offices in the building located at 1155 
Market Street, which is adjacent to the subject proposed 
facility at 1145 Market Street. Of the 140,000 rentable 
square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, approximately 
48,318 rentable square feet of space, on the third, sixth, 
seventh, and ninth floors, is currently used to accommodate 
274 1 PUC Water System Capital Improvement Project 
(CIP) staff positions. According to Mr. Harlan Kelly Jr. of 
the PUC, the PUC intends to lease space at 1145 Market 
Street in order to accommodate 89 additional Water System 
CIP staff persons, to be hired by the PUC (see Comment 



1 As stated on Page 2 of Attachment II provided by Mr. Harlan Kelly Jr. of the PUC, "Currently the 
CIP group occupies approximately 274 spaces at 1155 Market (212 Budgeted Filled Positions, 9 
positions from other City Departments, 36 consultants and 17 student interns) in approximately 
48,318 rentable square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 176 rentable square 
feet per person." There is no space allocated for 77 existing PUC positions which are currently 
vacant, according to Mr. Kelly. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

34 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

No. 1). As stated on Page 1 of Attachment II provided by 
Mr. Kelly, "Due to the time parameters and exacting 
conditions of the new CIP schedule, additional staff 
resources are needed which require the leasing of 
additional space to accommodate this increase in CIP staff." 
According to Mr. Kelly, under the proposed lease, the PUC 
would lease 30,790 rentable square feet of space in the 
building at 1145 Market Street at a rental cost of 
$64,145.83 monthly (approximately $2.08 per square foot), 
or $769,750 annually ($25.00 per square foot), to provide 
space for a total of 115 Water System CIP positions. 



Comments: Space Needs 

1. As shown on Page 1 of Attachment II, the Water System 
CIP currently has (a) 289 budgeted positions consisting of 
212 filled PUC positions and 77 vacant PUC positions, (b) 
nine positions from other City Departments, (c) 36 
consultants, and (d) 17 student intern positions associated 
with the Water System CIP, for a total of 351 positions. 
Mr. Kelly reports that the PUC anticipates adding 12 new 
PUC positions, for a total of 363 positions in the Water 
System CIP. Mr. Kelly further reports that the PUC 
anticipates hiring an additional 89 staff persons to fill the 
77 vacant positions and 12 new positions in the Water 
System CIP. 

Mr. Kelly advises that of the 12 new positions, six will be 
included in the FY 2004-2005 budget and six are included 
in the supplemental appropriation as discussed in the 
Budget Analyst's March 24, 2004 report to the Finance and 
Audits Committee under Files 04-0094 and 04-0095. The 
Budget Analyst notes that of the six positions included in 
the supplemental appropriation, the Budget Analyst is 
recommending approval of only three positions (see Files 
04-0094 and 04-0095). 

Attachment III, provided by Mr. Kelly, provides further 
details about the (i) 212 filled PUC positions, (ii) 77 vacant 
PUC positions, (hi) 12 new PUC positions, (iv) 36 
consultants, and (v) nine positions from other City 
Departments. 2 As shown in the table on Page 2 of 
Attachment II, the PUC anticipates accommodating 



Attachment III does not provide further information on the 17 student intern positions. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

35 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



approximately 115 staff persons in the proposed subject 
leased space at 1145 Market Street out of the total 
anticipated staff of 363 positions. The remaining 248 staff 
persons would be located at 1155 Market Street, occupying 
48,318 square feet of space, for a total of 363 Water System 
CIP staff persons to be located in both buildings. 
Currently, there are 274 Water System CIP positions now 
located at 1155 Market Street. According Mr. Kelly, the 
reason that there would only be 248 Water System CIP 
positions at 1155 Market Street if the proposed lease is 
approved, resulting in a reduction of 26 positions, or 9.5 
percent, is because more square feet per employee is 
needed. The square footage per employee would increase 
from 176 square feet per person to 195 square feet per 
person. 

2. As stated on Page 2 of Attachment II, the PUC currently 
accommodates approximately 274 Water System CIP staff 
persons at 1155 Market Street. Mr. Kelly reports that the 
274 Water System CIP staff occupy approximately 48,318 
rentable square feet of office space at 1155 Market Street, 
or an approximate average of 176 rentable square feet per 
CIP staff person. As shown in Attachment II, once the 77 
vacant positions are filled and 12 new positions are hired, 
increasing the total Water System CIP staff to 363 persons, 
Mr. Kelly reports that: 

• Approximately 248 Water System CIP staff persons, 
which is 26 staff persons less than the current 274 
Water System CIP staff persons, will be accommodated 
in the approximately 48,318 square feet of office space 
at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 195 rentable 
square feet per CIP staff person. 

• The remaining approximately 115 Water System CIP 
staff persons (total of 363 less 248) will be 
accommodated in the approximately 26,684 rentable 



BOARD OF SUPERVISOPvS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

36 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



square feet of office space 3 at the proposed subject leased 
space at 1145 Market Street, or an average of 232 rentable 
square feet per CIP staff person. 

As stated on Page 3 of Attachment II, "For comparison, the 
Real Estate Division reports that the Department of Public 
Works has approximately 250 rentable square feet per 
person for similar space usage at the leased facility at 30 

Van Ness." 

Attachment II explains that the average rentable square 
footage per person at 1145 Market Street will be greater 
than the average rentable square footage per person at 
1155 Market Street because of different office and cubicle 
space configurations and different common area space 
needs. 

The table below provides a summary comparison of (a) the 
current Water System CIP staffing and rental space under 
the existing lease at 1155 Market Street, and (b) the 
proposed staffing and rental space at 1155 Market Street 
and 1145 Market Street if the proposed lease at 1145 
Market Street is approved by the Board of Supervisors. 





1145 Market St. 


1155 Market St. 


Current Occupied Space 






No. of Rentable 
Square Feet 


- 


48.318 


Total Existing CIP Staff 


- 


274 


Rentable Square 
Feet Per Employee 


- 


176 s.f. 








Proposed Occupied Space 






No. of Rentable 
Square Feet 


26.684 


48.318 


Total Proposed CIP Staff 


115 


248 


Rentable Square 
Feet Per Employee 


232 s.f. 


195 s.f. 



3 According to Mr. Kelly, of the 30,790 rentable square feet of leased space at the proposed 1145 
Market Street facility, 26,684 rentable square feet will be occupied by the Water System CIP staff 
consisting of 115 positions. The remaining 4,106 rentable square feet on the 4 th floor will be occupied 
by the SFPUC Planning Division. Mr. Romani notes that the SFPUC Planning Division has been 
leasing approximately 4,837 rentable square feet on the 4 lh floor under a separate lease since April of 
1996. If the subject proposed lease is approved by the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Kelly advises that 
35 PUC Planning Division positions would occupy approximately 8,943 square feet of space (4,837 
square feet plus 4,106 square feet), or approximately 256 square feet per person. 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

37 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



3. The Budget Analyst notes that, as shown in Attachment 
III, the PUC anticipates filling its 77 vacant positions and 
12 new positions progressive^ from March of 2004 through 
June of 2005. Attachment V, provided by Mr. Kelly is a 
memorandum describing the justification for the space at 
both 1145 Market Street and 1155 Market Street. 

Leasehold Improvements 

4. The estimated total leasehold improvements cost of 
$1,094,008, consists of approximately $542,906 for tenant 
improvements, or approximately $17.63 per square foot, 
approximately $458,732 for 94 workstation units, or $4,880 
each, and a maximum of $92,370 for architectural fees, as 
shown in Attachment I. Based on negotiations, the Lessor 
would pay $369,480 ("Allowance") in leasehold 
improvement costs, or 58.2 percent of the tenant 
improvements and architectural fees estimated to cost a 
total of $635,276 (excluding the $458,732 for workstation 
units). The City would reimburse the Lessor for any costs 
exceeding $369,480, up to $724,528, resulting in a total 
maximum cost of $1,094,008 in leasehold improvements 
($369,480 plus $724,528). According to Ms. Hazel Brandt 
of the City Attorney's Office, under the provisions of the 
subject lease, in no event shall the City's share exceed 
$724,528. 

5. As noted above, the subject lease agreement requires 
that the lessor complete the leasehold improvements. 
According to Ms. Brandt, under provisions of the subject 
lease, the lessor would prepare final plan specifications and 
pricing plans related to the tenant improvements, which 
are subject to the City's prior approval. Ms. Brandt advises 
that the lessor is obligated under the subject lease to 
construct the leasehold improvements in accordance with 
City approved construction documents. 

Budget 

6. Attachment IV, provided by Mr. Kelly, contains a budget 
and all funding sources for all costs associated with the 
subject lease, totaling $2,385,471. Mr. Kelly reports that of 
the $2,385,471 total cost, $221,734 would be from funds 
previously appropriated by the Board of Supervisors during 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

38 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



the FY 2003-2004 budget, and $2,163,737 would be funded 
from the $16,719,301 pending supplemental appropriation 
request under File 04-0094. 

7. According to Mr. Kelly, the rent cost of $231,244, as 
shown in the Attachment IV budget, is based on estimated 
move-in dates that are staggered between February 1, 2004 
and June 30, 2004. Mr. Romani advises that the subject 
lease for the entire 30,790 rentable square feet is expected 
to commence on May 1, 2004, if the tenant improvements 
are completed. Therefore, the Budget Analyst recommends 
reducing the rent cost from $231,244 to $128,292, or by 
$102,952 to reflect the estimated May 1, 2004 lease 
commencement date. The Budget Analyst's recommended 
rent cost of $128,292 for FY 2003-2004 is based on a 
monthly rent cost of $64,145.83 x two months of rent (May 
and June) in FY 2003-2004. This recommendation is 
reflected in the Budget Analyst's report in File 04-0094. 

8. The budget contains $426,162 for the cost of furniture, 
which includes $39,765 to furnish five Manager's Offices, or 
$7,953 per Manager's Office, and $228,698 to furnish 41 
Standard Offices, or $5,578 per Standard Office, as shown 
on Page 2 and 3 of Attachment IV. The Budget Analyst 
recommends reducing the cost of furniture by $107,451, 
from $426,162 to $318,711, to reflect a more reasonable 
estimate of such furniture costs. The Budget Analyst's 
recommended cost of furniture totaling $318,711 is based 
on estimates obtained online for comparable furniture. The 
estimates obtained online include (a) the cost of one 
manager's office desk at $947 versus the PUC's budgeted 
cost of $4,000, (b) the cost of one standard office lateral file 
cabinet at $326 versus the PUC's budgeted cost of $700, 
and (c) the cost of one manager's shelf at $129 versus the 
PUC's budgeted cost of $300. This recommendation is 
reflected in the Budget Analyst's report in File 04-0094. 

Options to Renew 

9. The proposed lease agreement includes two five-year 
options to renew the lease with all of the same provisions of 
the proposed subject lease agreement, with the exception of 
the rent. Mr. Romani advises that under the proposed 
lease, if the City chooses to exercise one or both of its two 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

39 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

five-year options to renew, the monthly rental payment 
would be 95 percent of the prevailing market rate, which 
would be determined by the lessor. However, if the City 
disputes the lessor's determination, the prevailing market 
rate would be determined b} r either the average of two 
independent appraisers, or by a third independent 
appraiser, to be retained by both parties. 

Fair Market Value 

10. Mr. Romani states in Attachment I that, "It is the 
opinion that considering all factors, the flat rent of $25 per 
square foot, which includes full services but does not 
contain any operating expense pass-throughs, represents 
fair market value." 

Recommendation: Approval of the proposed resolution is a policy matter for 
the Board of Supervisors. 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 

BUDGET ANALYST 

40 



City and County of San Francisco 




Pa.ge J of 2 

Real Estate Division 
Administrative Services Department 



MEMORANDUM 



March 9, 2004 



TO; 



Leanne Nhan 

Budget Analyst's Office 



FROM: JenyRomani/Jy^-- 

Principal Real Property Officer 

SUBJECT': PUC Leasehold Improvement Budget/Tenant Improvement Cost 
Estimates for Lease at 1 145 Market St., San Francisco 

Source of Funds [Leasehold Improvement Work Budget] 

Landlord's Allowance: 5369,480 

City's Contribution: 5 724.528 

TOTAL $1,094,008 

Estimated Budget (Contractors Cost Estimates for Leasehold Improvement Work") 

Tenant Improvements: 5542,906 

Workstations (94): 5458,732 

Architectural Fees (max.) S 92.370 

TOTAL Sl.094,008 



Rent Cost 



It is the opinion that considering all factors, the flat rent of 525 per square foot, which 
includes full services but does not contain any operating expense pass-throushs, 
represents fair market value. 



(415)554-9850 
FAX: (415) 552-9216 



Office of the Director of Property 
25 Van Ness Avenue. Suite 400 

41 



San Francisco, 941 02 



Page 2 ot 2 













TENANT IMPROVEMENTS 






1145 MARKET STREET - PUC FLOORS 1,4,8 and 10 








BID PROPOSAL HARD COST BREAKDOWN 
































General Conditions 


$ 33,852 




Demo 




$ 20,800 




Carpentry 




$ 17,936 




Millwork 




NIC 




Doors/Frms/Hardwre 


$ 23,155 




Stone ceramic tile 


NIC 




Toilet Accessories 


NIC 




Glass and Glazing 


$ 9,425 




Drywall 


$ 39,568 




Acoustic Ceiling 


$ 12,382 




Floor Covering 


$ 103,210 




Painting /wallcovering 


$ 42,527 




HVACl 


$ 22,470 




Plumbing 


$ 6,678 




Fire Protection 


$ 9,176 




Electrical/Life safety 


$ 71,196 




Final Clean 




$ 6,500 




Permit Fees 




$ 8,500 




Signage/keys/FEC 


$ 3,000 




Blinds 






NIC 














TOTAL: 




$ 430,375 




FEE (5%) 




$ 21,519 | 


i 
i 




l 


SUB TOTAL: 




$ 451,894 




CONTINGENCY 10% 


$ 45,189 




Code Change Orders* 


$ 45,823 










GRAND TOTAL: 


$ 542,906 




I I 






Note: The Code Change Orders accounts for any escalating costs due to reasons such as increased building 


Ipermit fees, any additional work required by City plan checkers or onsite inspectors not shown 


ion the working drawings, possible relocation of existing HVAC ducts, sprinker heads, etc. 







































BID PROPOSAL FORM 3/9/04 
42 



HtLdcnmenx i j. 



**>U 




Water 

Hetch hetchy 
water & power 



Gavin Newsam 
Mayor 

E. Dennis Normandy 
Present 

Robert J Costello 
Vice President 

Commissioners: 
Ann Moller Caen 
AdamWtrbacn 
Ryan L. Brooks 

Patricia E Manel 
General Manager 

Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. 
Assisunt General 
nAangger 
Infrastructure 



Page 1 of 4 
san Francisco Public Utilities Commission 

Office of the Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure 
1155 Market Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco, California 94103 
Tel. (415) 554-0740 ■ Fax (415) 554-2466 • Email HKellv@Sfwatgr.org 



MEMORANDUM 




TO: LeanneNhan DATE: 

Budget Analyst 



FROM: Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. SUBJECT: 

Assistant General Manager 



March 8, 2004 



CTP Support Costs: 
Increase in 
Office Spare 



Background: 

The reorganization of the Infrastructure Division that manages the CIP is intended to 
make roles and responsibilities explicit, enhance organizational capacity, and foster 
cross-disciplinary interactions to increase and ensure staff productivity. The overall 
objective is to incorporate flexibility and agility into the organizational structure in order 
to meet the rapidly changing demands of a long-term, large-scale, multi-j urisdictional 
program such as the CIP. Due to the time parameters and exacting conditions of the new 
CIP schedule, additional staff resources are needed which require the leasing of 
additional space to accommodate this increase in CIP staff. 



Staffing Budget: 

With 289 budgeted positions, 62 consultants/students, and 12 new positions, SFPUC will 
need approximately 363 spaces to accommodate all positions as projected below. 



PUC Budgeted Positions Filled 212 

PUC Budgeted Vacant Positions 77 

Total Budgeted Position. 1 ; 



189 



Consultants 
Student Interns 
Staff from 

Other City Departments 
Subtotal 



36 

17 



62 



New Positions - Supplemental 
New Positions - FY 04-05 Budget 
Tom! New Positions 

Total CIP Positions Projected 



12 

m 



43 



Attachment II 
Page 2 of 4 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 2 
March 8, 2004 



There are 36 consultants of which 5 consultants are involved in training and organizational development 
and 31 consultants provide the CTP with continued administrative, financial and system support. There 
are 9 staff persons from other City departments to provide administrative, financial and system support. 
There are 17 interns, 4 high school student interns from the Mayor's Office Project Pull program and 13 
SFPUC student engineer interns. 

At this time the staffing projections are based on current information on project schedules. SFPUC 
anticipates that the 77 vacant and 12 new positions will be filled by June 200.5 given the approval of the 
1 145 Market St, lease and the timing of the City wide hiring process. 



Increase in Office Space: 

In September 2003 the SFPUC completed its consolidation of administrative staff from various locations 
into the office building at 1 155 Market St. Currently the CIP group occupies approximately 274 spaces 
(212 Budgeted Filled Positions, 9 positions from other City Departments, 36 consultants and 17 student 
intern positions) in approximately 4S,31S square feet of space at 1155 Market Street, or an average of 176 
rentable square feet per person. 

Since SFPUC staff occupies the entire building at 1155 Market St., it would be efficient to lease the 
available 30,790 square feet in the adjacent office building at 1 145 Market St. to accommodate the hiring 
of the 77 vacant and 12 new positions. SFPUC is expecting that 248 spaces will be required at 1 155 
Market St. and 115 CTP spaces at 1145 Market, for a total of 363 spaces, as shown. 

Based on expected full staffing date of June 30, 2005. 





1155 
Market 


1145 
Market 


Total 


Budgeted 
Positions * 


218 


35 


301 


Consultants & 
Students 


30 | 32 


62 


Total Spaces 248 | 115 


363 



Staffing at 1 155 Market St.: 

The technical divisions of the CIP (engineering, construction management and project management) are 
expected to remain in 1 155 Market Street. The approximately 48,3 18 square feet of space divided by the 
required 248 spaces yields 195 rentable square feet per person. 



44 



Page 3 of 4 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 3 
March 8. 2004 



Starting at 1 145 Market St.: 

The administrative and program development and support divisions of the CTP are expected to relocate to 
1 145 Market from 1 155 Market Street. Since SFPUC Planning Department will be occupying the 4* 
Floor at 1 145 Market St., the 4* floor is not included in the analysis. The total square footage at 1145 
Market St. is as follows: 



1W111§ 

§§gsSSIsij 




1st 


6,541 


8th 


11.305 


10th 


1 8,838 




26,684, 


4th 


4,106 


Total 


30,790 



The floors available to the C.FP group include the 1", S* and 10 th of which space will be needed for 1 15 
positions consisting of 57 filled budgeted positions, 26 vacant budgeted positions and 32 consultants. 
Common space will also be required on each floor for a conference room, training room, reception area, 
break room and a storage room. The CIP group* s 26,684 square feet (excluding the 4.106 square feet on 
4 n floor space occupied by the Planning Dept.) divided by the required 115 spaces yields approximately 
232 square feet per person. 

As noted, currently the CIP staff at 1 155 Market St. occupies approximately 176 rentable square feet per 
person. For comparison, the Real Estate Division reports that the Department of Public Works has 
approximately 250 rentable square feet per person for similar space usage at the leased facility at 30 Van 
Ness Ave. 

Below is a comparison of the average square foot per person at each building. 





Proposed at 
1155 Market St. 


Proposed at 
1145 Market St. 


Total Square 
Footaee 


48,318 


26,684* 


Total Employees 


24S 


115 


Average SF 


195 sf 


232 sf 



The positions and square footage in the table above 

does not include the 4,106 sf space used by the PUC Planning Department, 



45 



Page 4 of 



Office of the Budget Analyst 
Page 4 
March 8, 2004 



Explanation of Difference in Square Footage between 1 145 and 1 155 Market: 

1. There are approximately 30 and 35 built-in offices located at 1 145 and 1155 Market St. 
respectively. Since there will be more cubicle spaces for the engineering staff at 1155 Market St. 
than at 1 145 Market St., where the administrative and executive staff will be located, the square 
footage per person required at 1155 Market St. should be lower than 1145 Market St. 

2. Contract administration and operations will be located at 1 145 Market St. There will be larger 
conference rooms required to conduct the bidding meetings as well as additional storage for 
contract files. Additionally there will be a counter space serving as the reception area for the 
contracts department to meet with the public. 

3. CEP Public Outreach and the Training Division will be located at 1 145 Market St.. There will be 
conference rooms required to hold public meetings and training sessions. 



46 



List of Filled Positions 



Page 1 of 





Class 


Title Name 








1 5166 


AGM Infrastructure 


Harlan Kelly Jr. 


2 |5189 


Manager, UEB, PUC 


Mike Quan (Acting) 


3 10941 


Manager VI 


Carol Isen 


4 0941 


Manager VI 


Jeet Bajwa 


5 


1372 


Special Assistant XIII 


Marge Layne 


6 


1404 


Clerk 


Abel Zamarripa 


7 


1404 


Clerk 


Delia Quintero 


8 


1404 


Clerk 


Isaac Tarn 


9 


1404 


Clerk 


Joean Wright 


10 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Cesar Borja 


11 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Curtis Allen 


12 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Phyllis Porter 


13 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Tina Panziera 


14 


1406 


Sr. Clerk 


Wayne Ollila 


15 


1410 


Chief Clerk 


Sogra Kadir 


16 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


Jade Quach 


n 


1424 


Clerk Typist 


Karen Lim 


IS 


1426 


Sr. Cierk Typist 


Ceres de ia Paz 


19 (1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Charlene De Dios 


20 11426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Fay Deconinck 


21 1 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Lisa Thomas 


22 1 1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Moni Vibal 


23 


1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Peter Del Campo 


24 


1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Roberta Boyd 


25 11426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Trina Ramirez 


26 11446 


Secretary II 


Angela Chan 


27 1 1446 


Secretary II 


Connie Chang 


28 1 1446 


Secretary II 


Connie Gruber 


29 1 1446 


Secretary II 


Cynthia Dela Cruz 


30 11446 


Secretary II 


Feli Delgado 


3? 1446 


Secretary II 


Judith Meyer 


32 1446 


Secretary II 


Monica Menchini 


33 1446 


Secretary II 


Pilar Salvador 


34 |1446 


Secretary II 


Shirley Simpliciano 


35 1 1450 


iExec Secretary I 


Carmelita Navarro 


36 11450 


Exec Secretary I 


Dibbie Yeung 


37 [1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Gigi Borromeo 


38 11450 


Exec Secretary I 


Jenny Lee 


39 [1450 


Exec Secretary I 


LeeAnn Prifti 


40 1 1450 


Exec Secretary I 


Marie Aure-Flierder 


41 11450 


Exec Secretary I 


Nora Molina 


42 11450 


| Exec Secretary I 


Valencia Russell 


43 


1452 


Exec Secretary II 


Brenda Jones 


44 


1632 


(Sr. Account Clerk 


Prince Hallowell 


45 1 1632 


|Sr. Account Clerk 


Wendy Huang 


46 


1634 


(Principal Account Clerk 


Teresita Tina 


47 


1823 


|Sr. Admini Analyst 


Al Padua 


48 


1823 


ISr. Admini Analyst 


Anna Wong 


49 


1823 


|Sr. Admini Analyst 


Bert Felix 


50 (1823 


!Sr. Admini Analyst 


David Deasy 


51 1823 


|Sr. Admini Analyst 


David Letterman 


52 1823 


|Sr. Admini Analyst 


Jim Howells 


53 1 1823 


(Sr. Admini Analyst 


Jon Winge 


54 |1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Lee Okumoto 


55 11823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Linda Denari 


56 11823 


ISr. Admini Analyst 


Pauline Lam 


57 ,1823 


Sr. Admini Analyst 


Rosiana Tamsil 



Page 1 of 4 



Attachment A 



47 



List of Filled Positions 



n u tau iiiiicii l 11 



Page 2 of 



Class 


Title 


Name 




58 11824 


Assistant To AGM 


Edgar Poma 


59 :1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Jan Darby 


60 [1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Lourdes Cunanan 


61 11827 


Admini Services Manager 


John Cretan 


62 1 1844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Diane Zagorites 


63 11844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Evangelina Lim 


64 11844 


Sr. Management Assistant 


Joe Cowan 


65 5133 


Program Manager II 


Wendy Iwata 


66 5138 


Program Manager I 


Leonard Swanson 


67 5162 


Program Manager III 


Boon Lim 


68 15162 


Program Manager III 


Susan Yee (Acting) 


69 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Jack Lin 


70 !5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Jose Calle 


71 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Joseph Buitrago 


72 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Napoleon calimlim 


73 !5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Noreen Chan 


74 15201 


Jr. Engineer 


Renee Rosario 


75 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Annie Li 


76 15203 


Assistant Engineer 


Carol De Graca 


77 | 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Deidre Appel 


78 I5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Enriqusta Reyes 


79 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Ernie Barrientos 


80 ]5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Garret Low 


81 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jack Wu 


82 [5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jean Botro 


83 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Jeanne Sum 


84 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Lawrence So 


85 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Sam Chan 


86 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Sarah Blain 


87 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Thomas Jung 


88 I5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Yoli Quisao 


89 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Allen Lim 


90 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Chiu Lui 


97 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Duk-Soo Choi 


92 :5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Eric Gee 


93 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ernie Ricardo 


94 [5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Gino Grundy 


95 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Henry Kwan 


96 ,5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jaime Ramirez 


97 ;5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


James Sakai 


98 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jeannie Mak 


99 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Jeff Young 


100 J5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Joseph Chan 


101 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Kirit Bovishi 


102 :5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Leroy Gullette 


703 J5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Louis Schuman 


104 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Mai Huan 


105 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Manuel Rodriquez 


706 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Mary Jim 


707 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Michael Tennant 


708 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


On-Si Lam 


709 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Paul Louie 


7 70 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Pravin Shelat 


777 ;5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ralph Leong 


712 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Robert Tonjes 


713)5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Roger Tarn 


174 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Ron Yee 



Page 2 of 4 



Attachment A 



48 



List of Filled Positions 



Attachment 111 
Page 3 of 8 



Class 


Title ! 


Name 






775 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Santokh Kahton 


116 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Stephanie Wong 


117 15207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Suzanne Melville 


118 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Tedman Lee 


119 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vivian Chow 


120 1 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Wilson Lew 


121 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Alan T. Wong 


122 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Allan Johanson (Acting) 


123 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Bijan Ahnadzadeh 


124 


5211 


Sr. Engineer |Bill Melia 


725_, 


5211 


Sr. Engineer I Carol Finucane 


126 


5211 


Sr. Engineer I Carolyn Chiu 


127 \ 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Ernie lom 


128 1 5211 


Sr. Engineer | Fonda Davidis 


129 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Frank Mangold 


730 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Gilbert Tang 


731 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Hector Mau 


132 ! 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


John Hetzner 


733 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Luke Cheng 


734 1 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Mohammad Kohgadai 


735 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Patrick Lau 


736 15211 


Sr. Engineer 


Saed Toloui 


737 5212 


Principal Engineer 


Don Chan 


738 1 521 2 


Principal Engineer 


Kathy How 


739 5212 


Principal Engineer 


Steve Maiolini 


740 15241 


Engineer 


Abdi Abdirahman 


741 15241 


Engineer 


Albert Eng 


742 15241 


Engineer 


Albert Tom 


743 15241 


Engineer 


Alice Yan 


744 1 5241 


Engineer 


Angus Y I Chen 


745 15241 


Engineer 


Art Bree 


746 


5241 


Engineer 


Barbara Palacios 


747 


5241 


Engineer 


Bill Wong 


748 


5241 


Engineer 


David Hung 


749 


5241 


Engineer 


David Quinones 


750 


5241 


Engineer 


Francis McCormick 


751 


5241 


Engineer 


Joe Haas 


752 


5241 


Engineer 


Kathleen Price 


753 ;5241 


Engineer 


Kevin Barteaux 


754 15241 


Engineer 


Kevin Costello 


755 5241 


Engineer 


Mongkol Mahavongtrakul 


756 5241 


Engineer 


Peter Cheng 


757 J5241 


Engineer 


Rizal Villareal 


758 1 5241 


Engineer 


Romeo Rombawa 


759 |5241 


Engineer 


Ruperto Gonzales 


160 ,5241 


Engineer 


Thomas Hull 


767 -| 5270 


Sr. Architect 


Jim Buker 


762 15312 


Survey Assistant II 


Tom Checkowitz 


163 '5314 


Survey Associate 


D. Buck 


164 1 5346 


(Mechanical Engineering Assoc. I 


Fernando Delos Reyes 


165 5346 


I Mechanical Engineering Assoc. I 


Igor Gindin 


166 15354 


Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


James Fong 


167 1 5354 


Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


Jose Nuguid 


168 1 5354 


! Electrical Engineering Assoc. I 


May Shao 


169 |5362 


(Civil Engineering Assistant 


Ping Ping Yuen 


170 


5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


Posee Cheung 


171 


5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


IWilliamXie 



Page 3 of 4 



Attachment A 



49 



List of Filled Positions 



h l Ld l rim en i. n 



Page 4 of 8 



Class 


Title 


Name 




772 


5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Irene Yu 


173 


5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Margarita McKinney 


1 74 \ 5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Tracy Cheong 


775! 5366 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Lawrence Torn 


776! 5408 


Coordinator of CIP Outreach 


Lihmeei Leu 


171 5502 


Project Manager I 


Bessie Tam 


178 5502 


Project Manager I 


Bryan Dessaure 


179 5502 


Project Manager I 


Johnny Wong 


780,5502 


Project Manager I 


Ryan Cayabyab 


781 ;5504 


Project Manager II 


Calvin Huey 


782 15504 


Project Manager II 


Johnson Lim 


783:5504 


Project Manager II 


Kate Read 


784 [5504 


Project Manager II 


Lota DeCastro 


785 


5504 


Project Manager II 


Tasso Mavroudis 


786 


5504 


Project Manager II 


Tracy Cael 


787 15506 


Project Manager III 


Chris Nelson 


788 |5506 


Project Manager III 


Howard Fung 


785 !5506 


Projeci Manager III 


Johanna Wong 


790 [5506 


Project Manager III 


Manfred Wong 


791 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Affredo Joves 


792 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Allan Wong 


793 [6318 


Construction Inspector 


Arnold Galang 


794 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Benjamin Leong 


795 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Brian Roberts 


796 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Carl Lee 


797S6318 


Construction Inspector 


Carlos Grande 


798 [6318 


Construction Inspector 


Cosmo Tarantino 


799 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Dinesh Chaudari 


200 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Ed Pacero 


201 


6318 


Construction Inspector 


Gerry Fields 


202 


6318 


Construction Inspector 


Jerry Malone 


203 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Jose Poncel 


204 |6318 


Construction Inspector 


Kay Lee 


205 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Kirk Kuykendall 


206 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Larry Olsen 


207 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Ron Adams 


208 \ 631 8 


Construction Inspector 


Tim Meagher 


209 [6318 


Construction Inspector 


Tim Parkan 


270 16318 


Construction Inspector 


Tom Famham 


271 [6318 


Construction Inspector 


Ward Wong 


272 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Wyman Lee 





Page 4 of 4 



Attachment A 



50 



List of Vacant and New Positions 



ft L ua U II lit B II L ill 



Page 5 of 





Class 


I 
Title 


Name 


3ureau 


Expected 
Date of 
Hire 














1 


0922 


Manager I 


Vacant-Priority 


CMB 


Mar-04 


2 


0922 


Manager I 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


3 


0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


Apr-04 


4 


0933 


Manager V 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


Apr-04 


5 


2917 


Program Support Analyst 


Vacant-Priority * 


AGM 


Apr-04 


6 


2975 


Citizens Complaint Officer 


Vacant-Priority ** 


AGM 


Apr-04 


7 


0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Apr-04 


8 


1452 


Exec Secretary II 


Vacant-Priority 


AGM 


Apr-04 


9 


1824 


D rincipal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Priority 


RM 


Apr-04 


10 


0931 


Manager III 


Vacant-Priority 


AGM 


Apr-04 


11 


0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


CMB 


Apr-04 


12 


0933 


Manager V 


Vacant-Priority 


IRM 


Apr-04 


13 


0941 


Manager VI 


Vacant-Priority 


IRM 


Apr-04 


14 


0942 


Manager VII 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


15 


5508 


Project Manager IV 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


Apr-04 


IS 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


17 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


18 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PDS 


May-04 


19 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


20 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


21 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


PMB 


May-04 


22 


5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


23 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


24 


5174 


Administrative Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


25 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


26 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


27 


5344 


Mechanical Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


28 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


29 


5201 


Jr. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


30 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


31 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Priority 


EDB 


Jun-04 


32 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


33 !5364 


Civil Engineering Assoc. I 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


34 15241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


35 


5502 


Project Manager I 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


36 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


37 


5344 


Mechanical Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


38 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


39 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


40 


5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


41 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


42 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


43 


5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


44 |5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


45 


1426 


Sr. Clerk Typist 


Vacant-Hold 


IRM 


by Jun-05 


46 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


47 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


48 


5506 


Project Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


49 


5506 


jProject Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


50 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


51 


5506 


Project Manager III 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


bv Jun-05 


52 


1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


53 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


54 


5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


55 


5207 


I Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


I by Jun-05 



Page 1 of 2 



Attachment B 



51 



List of Vacant and New Positions 



Page 6 of 8 



Class 


Title 


^ame 


Bureau 


Expected 
Date of 
Hire 


56 5207 


Assoc. Engineer I Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


57 5207 


Assoc. Engineer iVacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


58 5207 I 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


59 15241 ! Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


60,5241 (Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


61 5268 


Architect 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


62 5365 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


63 5366 


Engineering Assoc. II 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


64 5362 


Civil Engineering Assistant 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


65 5504 


Project Manager II 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


66 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


67 6318 


Construction Inspector 


Vacant-Hold 


CMB 


by Jun-05 


68 5207 


Assoc. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


69 5270 


Sr. Architect 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


70 5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


71 


5241 | Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


72 


5241 


Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


PMB 


by Jun-05 


73 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


74 1 5203 


Assistant Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


EDB 


by Jun-05 


7511452 


Exec Secretary II 


Vacant-Hold 


AGM 


by Jun-05 


76 5211 


Sr. Engineer 


Vacant-Hold 


CMB 


by Jun-05 


77 1824 


Principal Admini. Analyst 


Vacant-Hold 


IRM 


by Jun-05 








1 


0941 


Manager VI 


New -Sup Budget 


AGM 


Apr-04 


2 


0942 


Manager VII 


New -Sup Budget 


CMB 


Apr-04 


3 !5293 


Planner IV 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 


4 5298 


Planner Ill-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 


5 


5298 


Planner Ill-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 


6 


5299 


Planner IV-Environmental Review 


New -Sup Budget 


PDS 


Apr-04 


7 '0941 


Manager VI 


New 


PDS 


Apr-04 


8 0923 


Manager II 


New 


IRM 


Jul-04 


9 ! 9922 


PSA-Assoc. to Professional 


New 


IRM 


Jul-04 


10 


5602 


Utility Specialist 


New 


PDS 


Jul-04 


ff 


5602 


Utility Specialist 


New 


PDS 


Jul-04 


72 5602 


Utility Specialist 


New 


PDS 


Jul-04 



Page 2 of 2 



Attachment B 



52 



List of Consultants 



Attachment 1 1 1 
Page / of b 



|Training/Org Development 






1 IWIP PhilKohne j AGM J 






2 WIP IRosieRios 


AGM 








3 | WIP TedWisnia 


AGM 








4 |WIP iVitaly Troyan 


AGM 








5 


WIP ! Jessica Romm 


AGM 






















CIP Support 












1 


WIP 


Alex Martinez 


IRM 








2 


WIP 


Margaret Berry 


IRM 








3 


WIP 


Deepalaxmi Rasaikar 


PDS 








4 


WIP 


Dennis Johnson 


PDS 








5 


WIP 


Fang Lee 


PDS 








6 


WIP 


Jerome Hou 


PDS 








7 


WIP jJohnMarley 


PDS 








8 


WIP 


Lora Bowman 


PDS 








g 


WIP 


Mark Spomer 


PDS 








70 


WIP Michael Kane 


PDS 








11 


WIP | Patrick Collins 


PDS 








12 


WIP Rudy Geronimo 


PDS 








13 


WIP IVoge Ayran 


PDS 








14 


WIP I Charles Campbell 


PMB 








15 


WIP I Christine Uy | PMB 








16 


WIP I Derrick Wong 


PMB 








11 


WIP | George Martinez 


PMB 








18 


WIP Joe Hill 


PMB 








19 


WIP iLuann McVicker 


PMB 








20 


WIP ! Susan Hou I PMB 








21 


WIP Tanya Yurovsky 


PMB 








22 


WMS 


Donna Courington 


PDS 








23 


WMS 


Margaret Weiland 


PDS 






















IWIP Support 










1 ,WIP |PaulSpickard 










2 


WIP Maggie Pinto 








3 


WIP iMylene Madarang 






i 


4 


WIP iChris Martinez 










5 IWIP i Les Tift 








6 iWIP UeanneMarz 










7 IWIP I Karineh Gregorian 










8 


WIP |LinKoh 












! 










Total Consultants I 36 


















I I 








|*Five consultants would provid training and development services, and 




31 consultants would provide administrative, financial and system support services. 



Attachment C 



53 



List of Positions from Other City Departments 



Attachment III 
Page 8 of 8 



1 

2 


Edgar Poma 
Carmelita Navarro 


DPW 
DPW 


3 


Jennie Lee 


DPW 


4 


Jim Buker 


DPW 


5 
6 


Jocelyn Quintos 
Lourdes Nicomedes 


DPW 
DPW 


7 

8 
9 


Karen Watson 
Anne Godfrey 
Don Munakata 


Airport 
Prop F 
Prop F 



To provide adminstrative, financial and system support. 



54 



0^°? 




Water 

hetch hetchy 
Water & Power 

clean Water 



Page 1 of 4 
San Francisco public Utilities Commission 

office of the assistant general manager, infrastructure 

1155 Market Street, 11th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 -Tel.; (415) 554-0740 ■ Fax: (415) 554-2466 "TDD: (415) 554-4388 



GAVIN NEWSOM 
MAYOR 

E.DENNIS NORMANDY 

PRESIDENT 

ROBERT J. COSTELLO 

VICE PRESIDENT 

ANN MOLLER CAEN 
ADAM WERBACH 
RYAN L. BROOKS 

PATRICIA E. MARTEL 

GENERAL MANAGER 

HARLAN L KELLY, JR. 

ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, 
INFRASTRUCTURE 



Summary Budget (Projected Total Moving Costs) 











Description 


Amount 


Funded 

from FY 03- 

04 Budget 


Suppl 
Request 


Rent 


231,244 




231,244 


Remodeling & Cubicles 


724,528 




724,528 


Computers & Monitors 


235,200 




235.200 


Furniture 


426,162 




426,162 


Other Equipment 


92,000 


92,000 





Other Office Supplies 


24,000 




24,000 


Other Materials & Supplies 


25,229 




25,229 


Network Equipment 


194,258 


100,991 


93,267 


1155 Market 


47,735 




47,735 


Telcom Eqpt & Wiring (DTIS) 


306,372 




306.372 


Movers 


28,743 


28,743 





Space Planning (DP W-BOA) j 50,000 
Projected Total Move Costs 2,385,471 


■221,734 


50,000 
2,163,737 



Note: Of the total $2,385,471, funding of $221,734 will come 
from the current FY 03-04 operating budget with the remaining 
$2,163,737 being requested through this supplemental 
appropriation. The detail budget listing of the furniture, 
equipment, SLipplies and leasehold improvements is included in 
Attachment E. 

Attachment F provides documentation on the leasehold 
improvements. 



:.. 



ggjg 












*° i 


















2 ! Si 














o 


















CN ''T 


iilil^l 
































r*-* 00 


~ 3 '"if 




































■•- 










o 


























© 


. 










© 




















r 




















oo 




















c 






rn 


w= 






































: - .'. - 


© © © © © 


© tr> u-i o 


o c 


»n 


un 







OT 





u-i 


© 


© © u- 


eo 


©©mso ©OO©©©© 




-T rs 


^o c 


O © O — © 


/l rN N C> 


3 I 




a 




© 




© 




© c 


© U-l 5C 




© 


m in o< mi wn © *n © in © 




rs_ u% r^ c 


in wn o. ©„ ©_ 


-- — c- — 


















« 












'-^" V ia] c 




rn 






o* 




©' 






r^ 


TT rf 


©' « r* 




t" 









































































-1 - ; ^ 
































- 


































MM 


m i/l m m m 


v\ U-. U-) >o 


i/l i» 


i m 
















































-T 


-r 


T T 


■* ^r -^ 


T 




•q-TT inw-immu-iu-, 




1 
























































































































































i 








































© r- 


o c 


o © © o o 


© © © ^ 




cr 


^: 




— 


„ 


© 


u-i 


© © 


© © v 


y 


© 


©moo OO-q-OO©-*^ 






m C 


© © © © © 


o ui r- r- 


© 4 


; in 


= 




— 




© 




© © 


© in a 


O 


© 


mrsr-i ©co©o^r©r-] 




0_ fN 


°1 C 


so o r^_ r-i_ ©_ 








C> 













© O 


*°» ""- K 






o»n— (N-^-t^-iorari© 




a 1- 




*n « 


— — " CN 












0* 




^f 
















r* 














T 






















































t 


-£? C 




































o 


-'iii C 




































— 


: - 




— r 


(N r-i in r^ (N 


CM N (S N 


rl r 


J rj 


-c 






















































* (N 






2 


- - 


&** 












































































o c 


3 © O © © 1 © 


© m *^ CO 


© c 


S in 


^. 




© 


U1 


© 


m 


O © 


© © w 


1 SO 


© 


©^ r^co^t^S' 








m c 


©©.©©'© 




© r 








— 




© 




© © 


0*00 




© 










^ C 




— »o — 






c> 












O O 


















































i'V •= 


c/3 


IN T 


r I — 








*""* 




r 1 


























































7 "c 


DQ 




































-i :-'-' 


1 l°° 






































1 t-q- r 


i o \c 


3 O ©1© © O 


O u-i wt oo 


© C 


a m 


^, 




O 


in 


© 


u-, 


© © 


O © w 


-, O 


© 


©mo ©©-3-©©©T 






IO ^ 


so \c 


;©©©©© 




© r 








© 


r- 


© 


t*« 


© © 


© w~. - 


" T 


O 


-Nw ©coo©-a-©r-j 








L **! ' c 


; n nic <C © 


— o — 






0% 






^o 


5> 


°1 






- © 




*n T 30^ IN -T m « N (N C 




1 






- 














t" 






©~ ©" 








-r (N — in 




hr w 


1 so 






























CN 




a E _ 






































.= 'tS ; c 




































— ;-l 


~ Oi £} 






































° ""> 












- 




r- 


r- 


r^ 


r- 


r- r- 


r- r- r 




r- 


r- r- co 00 00 co 00100 


o 










£ 


J 


s 










































































c 


o ; 


: © i ©i © © © 
- © © © ~ © 
3lf) fl VO *fl C 


o <n<n oo 


© 
— 








© 


1° 


© 
— 


r- 




© © 


© © »- 
© <•-. c 


3 3 


© 

© 


p^f-j r- co n t^ nlr-i 




I'l 


C/3 

o 


■*". - 


r — 








r^" 




3 




r- 












1 










































K - 


- 
































1 








3 O C 


s © © © Oi© 


© u-i un CO 


© < 




rf| 




© 


v-i 


~ 


U-, 


© 


© «■ 














;©©©©■© 




© 








© 




© 




© © 


© in * 




~ 


Cvr^-rn pvj n — ir^ir^r-© 






r-^ c 


3 r-_ c 




— o — 






C\ 





















P"; ©_ 0_ -d" CO 1-1 r-l O^ 






r^T r 




T — 












~6 






















^" v 


=> m 


































a -S x; 




































s 


~ - '_■ 




































;"■■*■ ^ 


































1 


























































































































































•"* 


3 ' 


































1 1 






F^ 


o 


3 © ©:© © © 

DO©.© © © 

3 m m o o © 


© u-i in co 


o 

© 


O i^- 


^T 1 




© 

© 


p 


© 


r- 


© © 

© © 


gle 


£ i = 



© 


S ^S 1 Si— " " ° S 




"H • o 


d" 


" T - 


T — 








r-^_ 




r i 


tN 


^ 


— 





iri 




— 


1 




~ : '= 


1 w 


































1 - 


o 
































i 




'1 = 






































***" 


























| 




! 1 j 




. - 


°* 


S O 

D O 


D © © © © © 

a ©■ © © © © 


o<n^ w 


© 
©■ 


— v- 


J 














1 1 ' 




l [ ( |oJj»n(r-ir'iir;p--T 










r r-% r— , -O C © 


— ^ — 






r-_ 


























* — *" 






















I ^ •*! — * ■* 
































II 






































- c «)*'-0 


























i i : 




" "-"i 


r,.-ui u 




























1 ] 


c 


^ 


M 










= 








!ais|aia|ais 












._ 


= 


J F 


















i ' j 1 1 1 1 1 




























— . 


DIO © ' © ' © O 




©I© 1 w-1 






I tniimco^vnioiin 








© 


=>©©©©■© 


w-i rs oo m 


o 








1 


1 r-l co . 1— 1 , r- I r-vpj 




1 -:J 






3 fl r-v O O © 


— SO — 






9 


■ill! 1 1 






ri ' i 1 




- _ 




























'= -:* ." C 


[•n- 


— 












lii 








1 i 1 




lii . _j 


1 IS 


d 




















































7' 


































r> ' 




1 i 


§ t . 




























I 








~ •'■ 




























' 








-^ 






























~M 


























































































































1 ■, 


C 






e 


. 


: : 






z 












1 K - 1 










^i 


•= >> 




« = 










'jz 












«. c -S l ^ i »i ail C 






l •- 


I 1 1 
1 b| 

ci u E 


(3 

La c 


J e 

= | I 5 
'S ||oa "f 


"c. 


■g c- 




c 


t 


i 

c 
[ 


L 

lZ 


[ 


w 5 

C 

"^ 1 3 


ill 


t- 
f ! 


c 
■£ 


5 j iliilfi 






ej zd. 


C _: m '5 — ■? 


w SliilElo 


& 


O ^-!_i oo.O'i- 


2 wiw '^.l-'O'D'O - niu^^c:^'^^- 



Page 
of 4 



S. 56 



Pace 4 of 4 







-=' . i 



J 



58 



Attachment V 
9 fin San Francisco public utilities commission 

\ SS Mj».o»:ct*>t. 1 !Tn f v Q 0n , E AN TRANCI3CO. CAO-41Q2 -TCU. t^]5t H^-D7dO, c&x (A IS) SS^'S^OO 




Water 

hetch hetchy 

Water 8c power 

clean Water 




MEMORANDUM 



GAVIN NEWS0M 
MAYOR 



E. DENNIS NORMANOY 

PRESIDENT 



ROBERT J. COSTELLO 

VICE PRESIDENT 



ANN MOLLER CAEN 
ADAM WERBACH 
RYAN L BROOKS 



PATRICIA E. MARTEL 
GENERAL MANAGER 



HARLAN L, KELLY. JR. 

ASSISTANT GENERAL 

MANAGER. 

INFRASTRUCTURE 



TO. 



Leanne Nhan 
Budget Analyst 



FROM: /Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. 
4* 



DATE: 



SUBJECT: 



March 18,2004 



Space Justification, 
1145 & 1155 Market 



In a memo to you regarding the proposed office space incr 
generally described the need for additional space to accommodate the anticipated 
increase in C1P staff. Subsequently, you requested explanation as to whether or not 
there will be periods of unoccupied space at either 1 145 Market or 1155 Market 
during the term of the lease. 

There are currently 300 work spaces on the 3 rd , 6 l \ 7 ,h and 9 Ih floors at 1 155 Market, 
occupied by 274 CLP employees and 26 SFPUC employees not directly working for 
the CLP. There will be approximately 1 15 CIP staff persons in the administrative and 
program development and support divisions of the CLP relocating to 1 145 Market, 
where there will be an estimated 115 available CIP work spaces. As soon as this 
supplemental request is approved and leasehold improvements are completed, which 
is expected by May 2004, the CIP group anticipates full occupancy of the 1 15 work 
spaces at 1 145 Market, with no unoccupied spaces. 

The technical divisions of the CEP (engineering, construction management and 
project management) are expected to remain at 1 155 Market. Concurrent with (he 
move to 1 145 Market, work will be done to increase and reconfigure the current 
cubicle spaces at 1 155 Market to provide an estimated 240 work spaces (as estimated 
by DPW's Bureau of Architecture in the proposal dated January 5, 2004). By June 
2004, SFPUC anticipates that of the 240 workspaces, 175 CIP staff persons, 30 
consultants/students and the 26 SFPUC employees not directly working on the CLP 
will occupy 231 work spaces at 1155 Market. Therefore, the CIP group anticipates 
approximately 9 unoccupied work spaces at 1 155 Market. However, as the 
remaining 43 vacant engineering positions are filled over the next 12 months, theTe 
will be full occupancy by June 2005 of the 240 spaces at 1 155 Market. It is expected 
that as the 43 vacant positions arc filled, consultants/intems will be required to share 
cubicles/offices. 

The SFPUC critically needs space adjacent to 1155 Market Street for CIP staff. Space is 
available now at 1 145 Market Street. According to the SFPUC Real Estate Division, if the 
SFPUC does not proceed with a lease for the entire space requirement, it will jeopardize its 
ability to lease the space it requires. 



Please contact me if you need additional information. Thank you. 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 

Item 9 - File 04-0099 



Department: 



Item: 



Description: 



Administrative Services (ADM) 

Ordinance authorizing the Department of Administrative 
Services to enter into written agreements with other 
public entities to provide such public entities with 
publishing, copying, printing and/or mail services, and 
ratifying and approving any actions heretofore taken by 
the Department of Administrative Services to provide 
such services to public entities. 

The proposed ordinance would authorize the Department 
of Administrative Services (ADM) to enter into written 
agreements with other public entities to provide such 
public entities with publishing, copying, printing and/or 
mail services ("Publishing and Mail Services") at the 
same rates charged to City departments. 

According to Mr. Robert Bryan of the City Attorney's 
Office, "other public entities" include any other federal, 
state or local public agencies, not including agencies or 
departments of the City and County of San Francisco. 

Currently, ADM provides Publishing and Mail Services to 
other City departments, through its Reproduction 
Services Program and the ADM — Reproduction Services 
Program budget is fully funded through work order 
recoveries. 



The Attachment, provided by ADM, describes the services 
to be provided and includes a list of all public agencies to 
whom services have been provided by ADM, and the 
payments received by ADM. Mr. Bryan states that ADM 
is required to obtain approval from the Board of 
Supervisors prior to entering into written agreements 
with other public entities. Mr. Ara Minasian of ADM 
advises that ADM was not aware that ADM was required 
to obtain Board of Supervisors approval prior to entering 
into agreements for the provision of Publishing and Mail 
Services with these public agencies. Therefore, the 
proposed ordinance would retroactively authorize ADM to 
enter into agreements to provide Publishing and Mail 
Services with the public agencies listed in the 
Attachment, which include the San Francisco Unified 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

60 



Memo to Finance and Audits Committee 

March 31, 2004 Finance and Audits Committee Meeting 



School District (SFUSD), the City of Concord, and Contra 
Costa County, while also authorizing ADM to enter into 
agreements to provide Publishing and Mail Services in 
the future to additional public entities. Mr. Minasian 
advises that ADM is currently discussing the possibility 
of entering into such agreements with (a) the State of 
California, (b) the City of Oakland, and (c) the County of 
San Mateo. 



Comments: 



1. As stated in the Attachment, "[ADM is] not going to 
need to add any production resources in order to provide 
the services to outside agencies. Therefore, the charges 
[ADM makes] to those agencies will help defray [ADM's] 
fixed costs and spread them out over a larger base, which 
should ultimately reduce costs to City departments." 

2. As stated in the Attachment, "[t]he department 
compares its pricing to estimates from the private sector." 
Mr. Bryan notes that the written agreements entered 
between ADM and other public agencies are negotiated 
service agreements that allow ADM to recover costs. Mr. 
Minasian notes that no additional personnel will be 
requested in the ADM FY 2004-2005 budget to provide 
services to public agencies. 



Recommendation: 



Approve the proposed ordinance. 




[arvey M. Rose 



cc: Supervisor Daly 
Supervisor Peskin 
Supervisor Ammiano 
Clerk of the Board 
Controller 
Katie Petrucione 
Ted Lakey 



BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
BUDGET ANALYST 

61 



^x Attachment 

City and County of San Francisco 

Reproduction and Moll Services • Administrative Services Department 

reprOOTffldlDU February 23, 2004 

Mr. Salvador Sanchez 
Budget Analyst's Office 
13 90^ Market Street, Suite 1025 
San Francisco, CA 941 02 

Mr. Sanchez, 

In response to your questions concerning the Department of Administrative Services- 
Reproduction and Mail Services providing "msourcing" service to public agencies 
outside of the City and County of San Francisco: 

Overview 

Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and Mail Services will provide 
Publishing and Mail Services to interested public agencies. The department has 
developed the resources to receive these projects electronically over the Internet. The 
intent is bring these sendees to agencies outside of the City system, offering discounts on 
print and mail while increasing revenue to the City itself. These agencies will be charged 
for these services at the same rates as City departments. 

By offering these services, Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and 
Mai] Services will realize revenue over and above its costs to the City. The Department 
of Administrative Services-Reproduction and Mail Services budget is 100% workorder 
funded from the City. We are not going to need to add any production resources in order 
to provide the services to outside agencies. Therefore, the charges we make to those 
agencies will help to defray our fixed costs and spread them out over a larger base, which 
should ultimately reduce costs to City departments. 

1 . List of agencies to whom Publishing and Mail Services are provided. 

San Francisco Unified School District 

FY 02/03 $56,324 

FY 03/04 $68332 

City of Concord 

FY 02/03 S998 

FY 03/04 $2459 

Contra Costa County 
FY 02/03 

FY 03/04 $538 



875 Stevenson Street. Room 1 25, Son Froneisco, CA 94103-0917 " Phone: 41 5.5SAM2.3 • Fox- 415J54.4801 • www.sfaov.org/rapromoil 

62 



Attachment 

Page 2 of 3 
Combined Charities 

FY 02/03 $4553 

Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and Mail Services has 
provided printing services during the City's annual charity drive. The department 
offers print services, including informational brochures, and sign up sheets. These 
forms are distributed to City departments by the charity involved. Typical groups 
include: United Way, Greenpeace and odier charitable organizations. 

In contact/planning to send work: 

State of California 
City of Oakland 
San Mateo County 

The agencies listed above have expressed an interest in obtaining print/mail 
services that they cannot do on their own. We have either set up exploratory 
meetings and tours of Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and 
Mail Services or provided estimates of starting various projects. 

We compare overall costs to revenues on a periodic basis to be sure that we are 
covering costs. As an internal service fund, we have to break even. Because of 
the wide variety of services we provide, we have not conducted a detailed analysis 
of cost recover}- - for each type of service. 

Management and production personnel check each order to ensure that 
Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and Mail Services are 
recovering costs. 

Increase in Revenue: 

Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction and Mail Services proposes 
to i; insource'' work from other public agencies. This work, encompassing design, 
print'and mail services is outside of the budget of the City of San Francisco. 
Revenue from these projects is above the normal work order recovery of the 
department. 

Die department compares it's pricing to estimates from the private sector. It 
allows for waste due to re-runs. The common industry standard for redo is 5% of 
die total number of impressions run. We use the figure above to cover 
unanticipated costs. 



3. Definition of each of sen-ices: publishing, copying, printing and mail services 
(collectively known as Publishing and Mail Services). 

Publishing is an umbrella term to describe these specific services: 

Copy: digital or traditional photocopy of user documents (generically called 
"Xeroxing"). Most often used now for reports and short run multi-page 
documents. 



63 



Attachment 
Page 3 of 3 

Printing: Traditional ink based reproduction. Typical orders of this type are full 
color printing, carbonless forms and letterheads. 

Mail Services: Any service related to preparing an envelope (or mass mailing) for 
processing by the United States Postal Service. This includes folding, insertion, 
and application of postage. Department of Administrative Services-Reproduction 
and Mail Services can offered discounts to other agencies to reduce costs from the 
standard 37-centrate. 

Please call me with questions. 




David Berman 

Reproduction and Mail Services Manager 

875 Stevenson Rm. 125 

San Francisco, Ca. 94103 



cc: AraMinasian 



64 




City and County of San Francisco 
-$Meeting Agenda 
Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 
Clerk: Mary Red 



City Hall 
1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place 
San Francisco. C A 94102-4689 



Wednesday, April 14, 2004 1 :00 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 



Note: Each item on the Consent or Regular agenda may include the following documents: 

1 ) Legislation 

2) Budget Analyst report 

3) Legislative Analyst report 

4) Department or Agency cover letter and/or report 

5) Public correspondence 

These items will be available for review at City Hall, Room 244, Reception Desk. 



0.25 / 



Each member of the public will be allotted the same maximum number of minutes to speak as set by 
the Chair at the beginning of each item, excluding City representatives, except that public speakers 
using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony 
time limit. If simultaneous translation services are used, speakers will be governed by the public 
testimony time limit applied to speakers not requesting translation assistance. 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
AGENDA CHANGES APR - 9 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REGULAR AGENDA 

031839 [Sidewalk Parking Fine Increase] 

Ordinance amending Article 7, Section 132 of the San Francisco Traffic Code, to increase the fine for 
sidewalk parking from $75.00 to $100.00 as of January 1. 2004, in accordance with Resolution No. 
648-01, adopted August 17, 2001; to update the fine for stopping on a freeway because of the repeal 
of Vehicle Code Section 25220 and enactment of Vehicle Code Section 21718; and to make various 
editorial changes to clarify the Penalty Schedule. (Parking and Traffic Department) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/13/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1 1/17/03, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Planning Department for environmental review 

12/2/03, RESPONSE RECEIVED. Statutorily exempt from Environmental Review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15273. Rates, 

Tolls, Fares and Charges. 



City and County of San Francisco 1 Printed at 1 1 :0" .\\t on 4/H/0-I 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, April 14, 2004 



040186 [Reimbursement Resolution] 
Supervisor McGoldrick 

Resolution declaring the intent of the City and County of San Francisco to reimburse certain 
expenditures from proceeds of future indebtedness; and approving and ratifying previous actions in 
connection therewith 

2/10/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee 



040194 [Employee Catastrophic Illness Program] 
Supervisor Ammiano 

Ordinance amending Section 16.9-29A(d) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize 
employee reimbursement of the Catastrophic Illness Program upon qualification for or receipt of 
disability benefits and amending Section 16.9-29A(i) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to 
authorize employee transfer of unused hours to pool if participation in Catastrophic Illness Program 
expires or is terminated. 

2/10/04. ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance and Audits Committee, expires on 3/1 1/2004. 



040318 [Amending Domestic Partnership requirements] 
Supervisors Ammiano, Dufty 

Ordinance amending Chapter 62 of the Administrative Code by amending the statement of purpose in 
Section 62.1; amending Sections 62.2(d), 62.3(b) and 62.5(b) to remove a waiting period for certain 
domestic partnerships; amending Sections 62.3(a)(2) and 62.10(a) relating to Retirement System 
requirements; repealing Section 62.3(c) to eliminate a residency requirement; amending Section 
62.6(a) to expand the rights and duties of domestic partners; adding Section 62. 1 1 to clarify the Board 
of Supervisors' authority to amend domestic partnership legislation; adding Section 62.12 to add a 
severability provision; and adding Section 62.13 to ratify and approve domestic partnerships between 
certain non-residents. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/16/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Rules Committee, expires on 4/15/2004. 

3/29/04. TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee Per fiscal impact determination from the Budget Analyst. 

April 8. 2004, President waived 30-day Rule. 

FILE 040389 WILL BE HEARD PENDING INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION 



040389 [Unrepresented Employees] 

Ordinance fixing compensation for persons employed by the City and County of San Francisco whose 
compensations are subject to the provisions of Section A8.409 of the Charter, in jobcodes not 
represented by an employee organization, and establishing working schedules and conditions of 
employment and, methods of payment, effective July 1, 2004. (Mayor) 

4/7/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:09 AM on 4/8/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday. April 14, 2004 



040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30. 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in 
classifications 0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 
Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII, 0943 Manager VIII, 1237 Training Coordinator, 
1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant. 2998 Representative, Commission on Status of 
Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 
Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 7334 Stationary Engineer, 
and 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain (Fire Department). (Human Resources Department) 

3/5/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 

3/31/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers Marsha Stroope. Deputy Director. Human Resources Department. 

Supervisor Daly; Supervisor Ammiano, Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Richard Rothman; 

Cindy. Local 790. 

Continued to April 14, 2004. 



040077 [2004 Annual Fundraising Drive] 

Hearing to consider applications from various agencies to participate in the 2004 Annual Joint 
Fundraising Drive. 

1/23/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 1/23/04 - From San Francisco Youth Fund 

2/24/04 - From Bay Area Black United Fund. Inc 

2/25/04 • From Community Health Charities of California 

2/26/04 - From Local Independent Chanties (L1C) 

2/27/04 - From United Way of the Bay Area 

3/01/04 - From Global Impact 

3/01/04 - Earth Share of California 

3/01/04 - Mayor's Fund for the Homeless 



031640 [Airport - Amendment to Concession Agreement and Lease Agreement for Rental Car 
Operations] 

Resolution approving (a) Amendment No. I to the Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for 
Rental Car Operations between Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent- 
A-Car Systems, Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of San 
Francisco, The Hertz Corporation, and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and the City and County of 
San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission; and (b) Amendment No. 1 to the Lease 
Agreement for Rental Car Operations between National Car Rental Systems, Inc. and the City and 
County of San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

9/26/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/10/04. CONTINUED. Continued to March 24, 2004. 

3/24/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee Speakers: Kathy Wagner. Airport. Harvey Rose. Budget Analyst 

Continued to April 14, 2004. 



040034 [Modification #6 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82-0115 with Delta Air Lines, Inc. at 
Terminal 1 of S.F. International Airport.] 

Resolution approving and authorizing the execution of Modification # 6 to Lease and Use Agreement 
No. L-82-01 15 with Delta Air Lines, Inc.. to reduce terminal space in Terminal 1 of San Francisco 
International Airport. (Airport Commission) 

1/20/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 1 1 :09 AM on 4/S/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, April 14. 2004 



10. 040035 [Modification #7 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82-0119 with Northwest Airlines, Inc. at 

Terminal 1 of S.F. International Airport] 

Resolution approving and authorizing the execution of Modification # 7 to Lease and Use Agreement 
No. L-82-01 19 with Northwest Airlines. Inc., to reduce terminal space in Terminal 1 of San Francisco 
International Airport. (Airport Commission) 

1/20/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



11. 040343 [Taxi Legislation] 

Supervisors Daly, Ma 

Ordinance amending Sections 1076, 1081, 1121. and 1148.1 of the Police Code to state a test, 
measured in cumulative hours per year, for satisfying the driving requirement imposed on taxicab and 
ramped taxi permitholders; to authorize modification of that cumulative hours test to accommodate 
disabled permiiholders; to increase the number of years of driving required of permit applicants to 
qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; to require that the City provide notice to permit applicants 
and taxi drivers of the driving required to qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; and to require 
color scheme permitholders to post a similar notice and maintain records of the driving performed by 
drivers affiliated with the color scheme. 

3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



12. 031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving 

requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations] 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1 186, 1 187, and 1 188, to 
restate the full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for 
violations of the full-time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and 
regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED. AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: 

Naomi Little. Taxi Commission; Barry Taranto; Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney. 

Continued to 2/1 1/04. 

1/28/04. CONTINUED AS AMENDED 

2/1 1/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Thomas Owen, Deputy City 

Attorney, Tara Houseman, James Kennedy; Mark Gruberg; Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana; Martin Smith; W Blake Derby; 

Barry Taranto; William Guthrie, Brooks Dyer; Mulgeta Woldemariam; Anne McVeigh; Johnson Akinboaunse. Mark Giogi; 

Dennis Korkos; Norma Geer; Michael Spain; Gerald Ganley; Jane Bolig; Robert Gross; David Basada; Jim Nakamura; Todd 

Rydstrom. 

Continued to 2/25/04. 

3/10/04, AMENDED. AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: 

Tom Owen, City Attorney's Offce; Rua Gratis. 

3/10/04. CONTINUED. Continued to March 17. 2004. 

3/17/04, MEETING CANCELLED. 

3/24/04, CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR. Speakers: Mark Gruberg, Male Speaker 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:09 AM on 4/8/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 14, 2004 

13. 040319 [MTA Workers' Compensation Administration Contract Award] 

Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Director of Transportation to award a contract to Sedgwick Claims 
Management Services for Workers' Compensation Third Party Claims Administration, not to exceed 
$3,183 million in the first year and adjusted annually by formula for four subsequent years, with the 
option of three one-year extensions to be exercised at the sole discretion of the MTA. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

FILE 031798 HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO BUDGET COMMITTEE. 



14. 031798 [Fire Station 33] 

Supervisor Sandoval 

Hearing on the Fire Department's provision of emergency medical and fire suppression services to the 
Fire Station 33 district for the duration of the closure of Fire Station 33 for seismic retrofitting. 

10/28/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to City Services Committee 

1 1/12/03. TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee 

12/10/03. CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Male Speaker. SFFD; Giselle Quezada 

Continued to 2/4/04 

2/4/04. CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speaker: Chief Joanne Hayes-White, SFFD. 

Continued to 4/14/04. 

4/7/04, TRANSFERRED to Budget Committee. Sponsor requests this item be heard April 15. 2004 



ADJOURNMENT 



IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City, by the lime the proceedings 
begin, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a part of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. Any 
written comments should be sent to: Committee Clerk of the Finance and Audits Committee, San 
Francisco Board of Supen'isors, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco. CA 
94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the 
committee clerk by that time may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 



Ci/_v and County of San Francisco 5 Printed at 11:09 AM on 4/H/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 14, 2004 

(Not to be considered at this meeting) 

Rule 5.40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREATE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction. The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing. In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken. 



There are no items now pending under the 30-day Rule. 



City and County of San Francisco 6 Printed at 1 1 :09 AM on 4/H/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 14, 2004 

Meeting Procedures 

The Board of Supervisors is the Legislative Body of the City and County of San Francisco. The Board has 

several standing Committees where ordinances and resolutions are the subject of hearings at which members of 

the public are urged to testify. The full Board does not hold a second public hearing on measures which have 

been heard in committee. 

Board procedures do not permit: 1) persons in the audience at a Committee meeting to vocally express support 

or opposition to statements by Supervisors or by other persons testifying; 2) ringing and use of cell phones, 

pagers, and similar sound-producing electronic devices; 3) signs to be brought into the meeting or displayed in 

the room; 4) standing in the meeting room. 

Citizens are encouraged to testify at Committee meetings and to write letters to the Clerk of a Committee or to 

its members. City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102. 

Agenda are available on the internet at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs.bos.htm. 

THE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL, ROOM 244, RECEPTION 

DESK. 

Board meetings are cablecast on SF Cable 26. For video tape copies and scheduling call (415) 557-4293. 

Requests for language translation at a meeting must be received no later than noon the Friday before the 

meeting. Contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554-7704. 

AVISO EN ESPANOL: La solicitud para un traductor en una reunion debe recibirse antes de mediodia de el 

viernes anterior a la reunion. Llame a Erasmo Vazquez (415) 554-4909. 

Hff >mtE&mm pes tA/mmm %$ 

sS'rg (415) 554-7701 



Disability Access 

Both the Committee Room (Room 263) and the Legislative Chamber are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #47 Van Ness, and the #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, 

call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of City Hall at Civic Center Plaza and adjacent to Davies Hall and the 

War Memorial Complex. 

All meetings are real-time captioned and are cablecast open-captioned on SF Cable 26. 

The following services are available when requested 48 hours before the Committee meeting. This advance 

notice will help ensure availability. 

• For American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting, contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554- 
7704. 

• For a large print copy of agenda or minutes in alternative formats, contact Annette Lonich at (415) 554-7706. 

• Assistive listening devices are available from the receptionist in the Clerk of the Board's Office, Room 244. 
prior to the meeting. 

• The Clerk of the Board's Office TTY number is (415) 554-5227. 

In order to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or 
related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various 
chemical based products. 



City and County of San Francisco 7 Printed at II .09 AM on 4/K/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 14, 2004 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine 
Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the 
people's review. For information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Donna Hall; by mail to Sunshine 
Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco CA 94102 by phone at (415) 
554-7724, by fax at (415) 554-7854 or by email at Donna.Hall@sfgov.org 

Citizens may obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance by contacting Ms. Hall or by printing Chapter 67 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code on the Internet, at http://www.sfgov.org/sunshine.htm 

Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements 

Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be 
required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance [SF Campaign & Governmental Conduct Code Sec. 2.100] to 
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the 
San Francisco Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102; telephone 
(415) 581-2300; fax (415) 581-2317; web site www.sfgov.org/ethics 



City and County of San Francisco 8 Printed at 11:09 AM on 4/8/04 



FINANCE AND AUDITS COMMITTEE 
S.F. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 
CITY HALL, ROOM 244 
1 DR. CARLTON GOODLETT PLACE 
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-4689 

IMPORTANT HEARING NOTICE!!! 




City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Minutes 

Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 
Clerk: Mary Red 



City HaU 

1 Dr. Carlton B. 

Goodlett Place 

San Francisco, CA 

94102-4689 



Wednesday, April 14, 2004 



1:00 PM 
Regular Meeting 



City Hall, Room 263 



25/ 



Members Present: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin. 
Members Absent: Tom Ammiano. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
APR 1 9 2004 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Meeting Convened 

The meeting convened at 1:08 p.m. 

REGULAR AGENDA 



[All Committees] 

Government Document Section 

Main Library 



031839 [Sidewalk Parking Fine Increase] 
Supervisor Daly 

Ordinance amending Article 7, Section 132 of the San Francisco Traffic Code, to increase the fine for sidewalk 
parking from $75.00 to $100.00 as of January 1, 2004, in accordance with Resolution No. 648-01, adopted 
August 17, 2001 ; to update the fine for stopping on a freeway because of the repeal of Vehicle Code Section 
25220 and enactment of Vehicle Code Section 21718; and to make various editorial changes to clarify the 
Penalty Schedule. (Parking and Traffic Department) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/13/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1 1/17/03, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT. Referred to Planning Department for environmental review. 

12/2/03, RESPONSE RECEIVED. Statutorily exempt from Environmental Review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15273. Rates, Tolls. Fares 

and Charges. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Cheryl Adams, Deputy City Attorney; Harvey Rose, Budget 

Analyst; Denis Mosgofian; Chris Buck; Allan Chalmers; Manish Champsee; Norman Rolfe; Greg Castillo; 

Tys Sniffen; Peggy DaSilva; Jeremy Nelson; Supen'isor Peskin; Diana Hammons, Department of Parking and 

Traffic; Julia Dawson, Department of Parking and Traffic. 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

Supen'isor Daly requests to be added as sponsor. 

CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 14, 2004 



040186 [Reimbursement Resolution] 
Supervisor McGoldrick 

Resolution declaring the intent of the City and County of San Francisco to reimburse certain expenditures from 
proceeds of future indebtedness; and approving and ratifying previous actions in connection therewith 
2/10/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Karen Ribble, Mayor's Office of Finance; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040194 [Employee Catastrophic Illness Program] 
Supervisor Ammiano 

Ordinance amending Section 1 6.9-29 A(d) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize employee 
reimbursement of the Catastrophic Illness Program upon qualification for or receipt of disability benefits and 
amending Section 16.9-29A(i) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize employee transfer of 
unused hours to pool if participation in Catastrophic Illness Program expires or is terminated. 
2/10/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance and Audits Committee, expires on 3/1 1/2004. 
Continued to April 21, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040318 [Amending Domestic Partnership requirements] 
Supervisors Ammiano, Dufty 

Ordinance amending Chapter 62 of the Administrative Code by amending the statement of purpose in Section 
62.1; amending Sections 62.2(d), 62.3(b) and 62.5(b) to remove a waiting period for certain domestic 
partnerships; amending Sections 62.3(a)(2) and 62.10(a) relating to Retirement System requirements; repealing 
Section 62.3(c) to eliminate a residency requirement; amending Section 62.6(a) to expand the rights and duties 
of domestic partners; adding Section 62.1 1 to clarify the Board of Supervisors' authority to amend domestic 
partnership legislation; adding Section 62.12 to add a severability provision; and adding Section 62.13 to ratify 
and approve domestic partnerships between certain non-residents. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/16/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Rules Committee, expires on 4/15/2004. 

3/29/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. Per fiscal impact determination from the Budget Analyst. 

April 8, 2004, President waived 30-day Rule 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Cinthia Goldstein, Human Rights Commission. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 
Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 14, 2004 



040389 [Unrepresented Employees] 

Ordinance fixing compensation for persons employed by the City and County of San Francisco whose 
compensations are subject to the provisions of Section A8.409 of the Charter, in jobcodes not represented by 
an employee organization, and establishing working schedules and conditions of employment and, methods of 
payment, effective July 1, 2004. (Mayor) 
4/7/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Alice Villagomez, ERD; Supervisor Peskin; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

Amended on page 32, line 27, delete entire line; same title. 

AMENDED. 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 
Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in classifications 
0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 

0942 Manager VII, 0943 Manager VIII, 1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management 
Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 
Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy 
Specialist, 7334 Stationary Engineer, and 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain (Fire Department). (Human 
Resources Department) 

3/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/31/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Deputy Director, Human Resources Department; Supervisor 
Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Richard Rothman; Cindy, Local 790. 
Continued to April 14, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supennsor Daly; Harvey Rose, Budget 

Analyst; Ed Harrington, Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes; See File 040491. 

DIVIDED. 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in classifications 

1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission 

on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 

Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain 

(Fire Department) and 60 promotive provisional appointments in classifications 0922 Manager I, 0923 

Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII, and 

0943 Manager VIII. (Human Resources Department) 

Continued to April 21, 2004. 

CONTINUED AS DIVIDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 
Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 14, 2004 



040491 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of 42 entrance provisional appointments in classifications 
0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 
and 0943 Manager VHJ. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supen'isor Daly; Harvey Rose, Budget 

Analyst: Ed Harrington, Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes from File 040239. 

Continued to April 21, 2004. 

CONTINUED AS DIVIDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040077 [2004 Annual Fundraising Drive] 

Hearing to consider applications from various agencies to participate in the 2004 Annual Joint Fundraising 

Drive. 

1/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 1/23/04 - From San Francisco Youth Fund 

2/24/04 - From Bay Area Black United Fund, Inc. 

2/25/04 - From Community Health Charities of California 

2/26/04 - From Local Independent Charities (LIC) 

2/27/04 - From United Way of the Bay Area 

3/01/04 - From Global Impact 

3/01/04 - Earth Share of California 

3/01/04 - Mayor's Fund for the Homeless 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Jill Lerner, Department of Administrative Services; Supervisor Daly; Cheryl 

Adams, Deputy City Attorney; Ben Rosenfield, Mayor's Office. 

PREPARED IN COMMITTEE AS A RESOLUTION. 

Resolution designating those agencies qualified to participate in the 2004 Annual Joint Fundraising Drive for 

officers and employees of the City and County of San Francisco. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



031640 [Airport - Amendment to Concession Agreement and Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations] 

Resolution approving (a) Amendment No. 1 to the Concession Agreements and Lease Agreements for Rental 
Car Operations between Alamo Rent-A-Car, LLC, Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, 
Inc., Dollar Rent-A-Car System, Inc., Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of San Francisco, The Hertz 
Corporation, and Thrifty Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and 
through its Airport Commission; and (b) Amendment No. 1 to the Lease Agreement for Rental Car Operations 
between National Car Rental Systems, Inc. and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its 
Airport Commission. (Airport Commission) 

(Fiscal impact; No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

9/26/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/10/04. CONTINUED. Continued to March 24, 2004. 

3/24/04, CONTINUED Heard in Committee Speakers: Kathy Wagner. Airport; Harvey Rose. Budget Analyst 

Continued to April 14, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Han>ey Rose, Budget Analyst. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 
Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 14, 2004 



040034 [Modification #6 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82-0115 with Delta Air Lines, Inc. at Terminal 1 of 
S.F. International Airport.] 

Resolution approving and authorizing the execution of Modification # 6 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82- 

01 15 with Delta Air Lines, Inc., to reduce terminal space in Terminal 1 of San Francisco International Airport. 

(Airport Commission) 

1/20/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supen'isor Peskin; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supervisor Daly; Harvey Rose, 

Budget Analyst. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040035 [Modification #7 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82-0119 with Northwest Airlines, Inc. at Terminal 1 
of S.F. International Airport] 

Resolution approving and authorizing the execution of Modification # 7 to Lease and Use Agreement No. L-82- 

01 19 with Northwest Airlines, Inc., to reduce terminal space in Terminal 1 of San Francisco International 

Airport. (Airport Commission) 

1/20/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Peskin; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supen'isor Daly; Han'ey Rose, 

Budget Analyst. 

RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040343 [Taxi Legislation] 

Supervisors Daly, Ma 

Ordinance amending Sections 1076, 1081, 1121, and 1148.1 of the Police Code to state a test, measured in 

cumulative hours per year, for satisfying the driving requirement imposed on taxicab and ramped taxi 

permitholders; to authorize modification of that cumulative hours test to accommodate disabled permitholders; 

to increase the number of years of driving required of permit applicants to qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi 

permit; to require that the City provide notice to permit applicants and taxi drivers of the driving required to 

qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; and to require color scheme permitholders to post a similar notice 

and maintain records of the driving performed by drivers affiliated with the color scheme. 

3/16/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Executive Director, Taxi Commission; Supervisor Daly; Carl 

MacMurdo; Robert Cesana; Jim Nakamura; Mark Gruberg; Jim Kennedy; Hansu Kim; Desta; Supervisor 

Peskin. 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 1 1:U. \\f on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 14, 2004 



031960 [Establishing administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full-time driving requirement 
and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations] 

Ordinance amending the San Francisco Police Code by adding Sections 1186, 1187, and 1 1 88, to restate the 
full-time driving requirement, and to establish administrative penalties and procedures for violations of the full- 
time driving requirement and for violations of the Taxi Commission's rules and regulations. (Taxi Commission) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/25/03. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1/28/04, AMENDED. AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, 

Taxi Commission; Barry Taranto; Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney. 

Continued to 2/1 1/04. 

1/28/04, CONTINUED AS AMENDED. 

2/1 1/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Thomas Owen, Deputy City Attorney; Tara 

Houseman; James Kennedy; Mark Gruberg; Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana; Martin Smith; W. Blake Derby; Barry Taranto; William 

Guthrie; Brooks Dyer; Mulgeta Woldemariam; Anne McVeigh; Johnson Akinboaunse; Mark Giogi; Dennis Korkos; Norma Geer; 

Michael Spain; Gerald Ganley; Jane Bolig; Robert Gross; David Basada; Jim Nakamura; Todd Rydstrom. 

Continued to 2/25/04. 

3/10/04, AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Tom Owen, 

City Attorney's Offce; Ruach Graffis. 

3/10/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 17, 2004. 

3/17/04, MEETING CANCELLED. 

3/24/04, CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR. Speakers: Mark Gruberg; Male Speaker. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Executive Director, Taxi Commission; Supervisor Daly; Carl 

MacMurdo; Robert Cesana; Jim Nakamura; Mark Gruberg; Jim Kennedy; Hansu Kim; Desta; Supervisor 

Peskin. 

Withdrawn at request of Taxi Commission. 

TABLED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 

Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



040319 [MTA Workers' Compensation Administration Contract Award] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Director of Transportation to award a contract to Sedgwick Claims Management 
Services for Workers' Compensation Third Party Claims Administration, not to exceed $3,183 million in the 
first year and adjusted annually by formula for four subsequent years, with the option of three one-year 
extensions to be exercised at the sole discretion of the MTA. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Jeff Gary, Manager, MTA Compensation; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; 

Supen'isor Daly; Cheryl Adams, Deputy City Attorney. 

Amended to show retroactive to March 27, 2004; new title. 

AMENDED. 

Resolution authorizing retroactive to March 27, 2004, the Director of Transportation to award a contract to 

Sedgwick Claims Management Services for Workers' Compensation Third Party Claims Administration, not to 

exceed $3,183 million in the first year and adjusted annually by formula for four subsequent years, with the 

option of three one-year extensions to be exercised at the sole discretion of the MTA. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 2 - Daly, Peskin 
Absent: 1 - Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes April 14, 2004 



FILE 031798 HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO BUDGET COMMITTEE. 



031798 [Fire Station 33] 

Supervisor Sandoval 

Hearing on the Fire Department's provision of emergency medical and fire suppression services to the Fire 

Station 33 district for the duration of the closure of Fire Station 33 for seismic retrofitting. 

10/28/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to City Services Committee. 

1 1/1 2/03, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

12/10/03, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Male Speaker, SFFD; Giselle Quezada. 

Continued to 2/4/04. 

2/4/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speaker: Chief Joanne Hayes-White, SFFD. 

Continued to 4/14/04. 

4/7/04, TRANSFERRED to Budget Committee. Sponsor requests this item be heard April 15, 2004. 

NO ACTION TAKEN. PENDING IN COMMITTEE.. 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m. 



City and County of San Francisco I'rinled at 11:13 AM on 4/16/04 



City and County of San Francisco , ^ Cl ^ y " a _" D 

Meeting Minutes t AI1 Committees] 

Finance and Audits Committee M° ve [T ent Document Section 

Main Library 

{^ . tips Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 

Clerk: Mary Red 

Wednesday, April 21 , 2004 1 :00 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 

Members Present: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

Meeting Convened APR 2 6 2004 

tv , j ,,«„ SAN FRANCISCO 

The meeting convened at 1:08 p.m. PUBLIC LIBRARY 

031991 [Work Practices for Lead-Based Paint and Fees For Implementation of Work Practices Program 
Provisions Regarding Interiors] 
Supervisors Peskin, Maxwell 

Ordinance amending Section 3407 et seq., Section 1 10 Table 1-A and Section 1 10 Table 1-P of the San 
Francisco Building Code to regulate work that disturbs or removes lead-based paint in the interior of pre- 1979 
buildings that are in Group E3, Rl or R3 occupancy classification, as well as, the exterior of pre- 1979 
buildings and all steel structures; establish performance standards for work that disturbs or removes lead-based 
paint in the interior and exterior of such buildings and steel structure; conform the process for assessing 
administrative penalties with that for the issuance of an Order of Abatement, to provide a surcharge fee for 
alteration permits sought for buildings classified as R3 and E3 that were constructed prior to 1979 to 
implement the lead interior safe work practices provisions of Section 3407 et seq., to provide a surcharge 
license fee for apartment houses and hotels constructed prior to 1979, other than those operating only as tourist 
hotels, to implement the lead interior safe work practices provisions of Section 3407 et seq., and to make 
findings in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 as to the local climatic, 
topological and geological reasons for amending the State Building Code. 

(3/30/04 in Board: Supervisor Peskin submitted a substitute ordinance bearing new title; Companion measure 

to File 031992.) 

1 2/9/03. ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to City Services Committee, expires on 1/8/2004. 2/21/04: Supervisor Maxwell requested 

to be added as a co-sponsor. 

2/26/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 18, 2004. 

3/8/04, RESPONSE RECEIVED. Youth Commission supports Ordinance per memorandum dated March 1, 2004. 

3/18/04, CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR. 

3/30/04. SUBSTITUTED. Supervisor Peskin submitted a substitute ordinance bearing new title. 

3/30/04, ASSIGNED to City Services Committee. 

3/31/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

4/8/04, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Planning Department for environmental review determination. 

4/8/04, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT. Referred to Building Inspection Commission for review and comment. 

4/14/04. RESPONSE RECEIVED. Planning Department, exempt from CEQA per guidelines. Section 15061(b)(3). 

Continued to May 12, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 1 I'nntcil at >:2(l I'M 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 21, 2004 



031992 [Relocation of Persons Affected by Lead Hazards] 
Supervisors Peskin, Maxwell 

Ordinance amending Section 596 of the San Francisco Health Code and Sections 37.3, 37.9, 72.1 to 72.3, 
inclusive, and 72.5 of the San Francisco Administrative Code providing for orders to vacate and notices to pay 
relocation benefits, providing for a hearing process under Article 11 of the Health Code if a notice to pay 
relocation benefits is not complied with, disallowing passthroughs to tenants of the costs of lead remediation 
performed in accordance with Article 1 1 of the Health Code when lead hazards remedied are a result of 
deferred maintenance; authorizing landlords to temporarily recover possession of a unit for the purposes of 
performing lead remediation as required by the Department in accordance with Article 1 1 of the Health Code 
but only for the minimum time required to perform the remediation; increasing relocation payments required 
under Chapter 72 and indexing those relocation payments to the Consumer Price Index as of July 1, 2004; and 
providing an alternative to making relocation payments if a comparable dwelling unit is made available. 
12/9/03, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to City Services Committee, expires on 1/8/2004. 3/1 1/04: Supervisor Maxwell requested 
to be added as a co-sponsor. 

1/2/04, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT. Referred to Youth Commission for review and comments. 
2/26/04, CONTINUED. Continued to March 18, 2004. 
3/18/04. CONTINUED TO CALL OF THE CHAIR. 
3/30/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Continued to May 12, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040467 [Ryan White CARE Act Funding] 
Supervisors Daly, Dufty 

Hearing to review a proposal by Health Director Mitch Katz to maintain CARE funded services, and to prepare 
in committee and report to the Full Board of Supervisors ordinances or resolutions as may be necessary to 
maintain these services. 

4/13/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. Sponsor requests this item be scheduled for consideration at 
the April 21. 2004 meeting. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supen'isor Daly; Dr. Mitchell Katz, Health Department; Supennsor 
Ammiano; Bill Hirsh, ALRP; Dr. Marlene Ritchie, Director, Substance Abuse Ser\'ices; Hywel Sims, Shanti; 
Donald Frazier, Walden House; Mike Smith; Rachel Matillane. James Lloyce; Health Department. 
FILED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040194 [Employee Catastrophic Illness Program] 
Supervisor Ammiano 

Ordinance amending Section 16.9-29A(d) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize employee 
reimbursement of the Catastrophic Illness Program upon qualification for or receipt of disability benefits and 
amending Section 16.9-29A(i) of the San Francisco Administrative Code to authorize employee transfer of 
unused hours to pool if participation in Catastrophic Illness Program expires or is terminated. 
2/10/04, ASSIGNED UNDER 30 DAY RULE to Finance and Audits Committee, expires on 3/1 1/2004. 
4/14/04. CONTINUED. Continued to April 21, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speaker: Supervisor Ammiano. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE, 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 5:20 PM on 4/21/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 21, 2004 



040240 [Reserved Funds, Fire Department] 

Hearing to consider release of reserved funds, Fire Department fiscal year 2003-04 Budget, in the amount of 
$1,543,139, to fund the Department's training and education functions. (Fire Department) 
3/4/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers; Joanne Hayes-White, Chief, Fire Department; Supervisor Peskin; Harvey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Supervisor Daly. 
Release of reserved funds in the amount of $1,543,139 were approved. 
APPROVED AND FILED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in classifications 
1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission 
on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 
Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain 
(Fire Department) and 60 promotive provisional appointments in classifications 0922 Manager I, 0923 
Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII, and 
0943 Manager VIII. (Human Resources Department) 
3/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/31/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Deputy Director, Human Resources Department; Supervisor 
Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Richard Rothman; Cindy, Local 790. 
Continued to April 14, 2004. 

4/14/04, DIVIDED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supervisor Daly; Harvey Rose, Budget 
Analyst; Ed Harrington. Controller. 
Divided 42 management classes; See File 040491. 
4/14/04, CONTINUED AS DIVIDED. Continued to April 21, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supen'isor Daly; Marsha Stroope, Human Resources Department; Harvey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supervisor Peskin; Katie Petrucione, 
Mayor's Office; Monique Zmuda, Controller's Office. 
Continued to April 28, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040491 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of 42 entrance provisional appointments in classifications 

0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 

and 0943 Manager VIII. 

4/14/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED AS DIVIDED. Heard in Committee Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supervisor Daly; Harvey 

Rose, Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington. Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes from File 040239. 

Continued to April 21, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Marsha Stroope, Human Resources Department; Harvey 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Supen'isor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supen'isor Peskin; Katie Petrucione, 
Mayor's Office; Monique Zmuda, Controller's Office. 
Continued to April 28, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 5:21 I'M on 4/21/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes April 21, 2004 



040416 [Sheriff's Elections Security for 2003 Elections] 
Supervisor Peskin 

Hearing to consider the Budget Analyst's review of Sheriffs Elections Security for the October, November and 
December of 2003 Elections in San Francisco. 

3/30/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. Sponsor requests this item be scheduled for consideration at 
the April 14, 2004 meeting. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Peskin; Debra Newman, Budget Analyst's Office; Michael 
Hennessey, Sheriff; John Arntz, Director, Department of Elections; Elaine Forbes, Budget Analyst's Office. 
FILED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 3:02 p.m. 



City and County of San Francisco 4 Printed at 5:21 PM on 4/21/04 




Sheinfield/CTYATT@CT 
YATT 

04/20/2004 10:50 AM 



To Ted Lakey/CTYATT@CTYATT 

Cheryl Adams/CTYATT@CTYATT, Brad 
cc Benson/BOS/SFGOV@SFGOV, Dan 
Maguire/CTYATT@CTYATT, David 
bcc 
Subject Catastrophic Illness Program Ordinance 



Ted: 

Attached is the electronic version of the Catastrophic Illness Program Ordinance with the change you 
need to introduce in committee. 



Cip7.doc 

Page 3, lines 9-10 used to read, " Failure to do so will result in the City's placing a lien for the 
unreimbursed amount on the employee's future wages, benefits and/or retirement. " 

They now read, " Failure to do so will result in the City's placing a lien for the unreimbursed amount on the 
employee's future wages and benefits (not including workers' compensation or retirement). 



As you will recall, State law prohibits lien's on workers' comp or retirement benefits under the 
circumstances we propose. 

By this email, I am also forwarding an electronic copy to the Board Clerk. My secretary will be delivering 
hard copies to the Clerk today. 

Please call me with any questions. 



Rick Sheinfield 
Deputy City Attorney 

Tel: 415.554.3872 
Fax: 415.557.6747 
email: rick.sheinfield@sfgov.org 

The information in this email is confidential and protected by the attorney /client and/or work product 
privileges. If you received this email inadvertently, please permanently delete it. 



City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Agenda 
5 Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 
Clerk: Mary Red 



City Hall 
1 Dr Carlton B Goodletl Place 
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689 



Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1 :00 PM City Hall, Room 263 

Regular Meeting 



Note: Each item on the Consent or Regular agenda may include the following documents: 

1 ) Legislation 

2) Budget Analyst report 

3) Legislative Analyst report 

4) Department or Agency cover letter and/or report 

5) Public correspondence 

These items will be available for review at City Hall, Room 244, Reception Desk. 



ISl 



Each member of the public will be allotted the same maximum number of minutes to speak as set by 
the Chair at the beginning of each item, excluding City representatives, except that public speakers 
using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony 
tune limit. If simultaneous translation services are used, speakers will be governed by the public 
testimony time limit applied to speakers not requesting translation assistance. 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
AGENDA CHANGES APR 2 6 2004 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REGULAR AGENDA 04-26-04 a 



1. 031839 [Sidewalk Parking Fine Increase] 

Supervisor Daly 

Ordinance amending Article 7, Section 132 of the San Francisco Traffic Code, to increase the fine for 
sidewalk parking from $75.00 to $100.00 as of January 1, 2004, in accordance with Resolution No. 
648-01, adopted August 17, 2001; to update the fine for stopping on a freeway because of the repeal 
of Vehicle Code Section 25220 and enactment of Vehicle Code Section 21718; and to make various 
editorial changes to clarify the Penalty Schedule. (Parking and Traffic Department) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/13/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED lo Finance and Audits Committee. 

1 1/17/03, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Planning Department for environmental review. 
12/2/03, RESPONSE RECEIVED. Statutonly exempt from Environmental Review CEQA Guidelines Section 15273. Rates. 
Tolls, Fares and Charges. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Cheryl Adams, Deputy City Attorney; Harvey- 
Rose, Budget Analyst; Denis Mosgofian; Chris Buck; Allan Chalmers; Manish Champsee; Norman Rolfe. Greg Castillo; Tys 
Sniffen; Peggy DaSilva; Jeremy Nelson; Supervisor Peskin, Diana Hammons. Departmenl of Parking and Traffic; Julia 
Dawson, Department of Parking and Traffic 
Continued to April 28. 2004. 
Supervisor Daly requests to be added as sponsor. 

City and County of San Francisco I Printed at 11:33 AM mi 4/22104 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday. April 28, 2004 



040061 [DPT Management and Accounting Controls] 
Supervisor Ma 

Hearing to review the Department of Parking and Traffic's management and accounting controls over 
the City's parking ticket division, including but not limited to, the procedures in place to avoid ticket 
fixing. 

1/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040329 [Conditional approval of an historical property contract for 690 Market Street - The Chronicle 
Building] 
Supervisor Peskin 

Resolution under Chapter 71 of the San Francisco Administrative Code, conditionally approving an 
historical property contract between 690 HTC LLC and 690B LLC, the owners of conditional 
landmark No. 243 at 690 Market Street and the City and County of San Francisco, conditionally 
authorizing the Director of Planning and the Assessor to execute the historical property contract. 

3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040454 [General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004-RI] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the issuance from time to time in one or more series of not to exceed 
$800,000,000 Aggregate Principal Amount of City and County of San Francisco General Obligation 
Refunding Bonds; approving the form and authorizing the execution of General Obligation Refunding 
Bonds; approving the form and authorizing the execution of Declarations of Trust; authorizing the 
appointment of depositories and other agents; approving the form and authorizing the execution and 
delivery of Escrow Agreements; approving the tax levy for repayment of the General Obligation 
Refunding Bonds; approving procedures for the sale and award of General Obligation Refunding 
Bonds; approving the form of Official Notices of Sale; authorizing the publication of Notices of 
Intention to Sell; approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of Bond Purchase 
Agreements; approving the form and authorizing the execution and delivery of Continuing Disclosure 
Certificates; authorizing selection of underwriters; approving the form of and authorizing the 
distribution of Preliminary Official Statements and authorizing execution and delivery of Official 
Statements; approving the appointment of verification agents; approving the retention of other agents 
and payment of compensation to such agents; authorizing payment of costs of issuance; approving 
modifications to documents; ratifying actions previously taken; and granting general authority to City 
officials to take necessary actions in connection with the authorization, issuance, sale and delivery of 
said General Obligation Refunding Bonds and the refunding of certain outstanding General 
Obligation Bonds. 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:33 AM on 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, April 28, 2004 



040455 [Refunding Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco Lease Revenue 
Bonds, Series 1994, (George R. Moscone Convention Center)] 
Mayor 

Resolution approving the issuance and sale of lease revenue refunding bonds to refinance lease 
revenue bonds previously issued and sold by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of 
San Francisco (the "Agency"); authorizing the release of reserved monies; approving the form of a 
project lease between the Agency and the City and County of San Francisco (including certain 
indemnities contained therein); approving the form of the official statement in preliminary and final 
form; approving the form of the continuing disclosure certificate; approving the form of irrevocable 
refunding instructions; and, ratifying previous actions taken in connection therewith. 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



040236 [Community Choice Aggregation Program] 
Supervisors Ammiano, Maxwell, Gonzalez 

Ordinance establishing a Community Choice Aggregation Program in accordance with California 
Public Utilities Code Sections 218.3, 331.1, 366, 366.2, 381.1, 394, and 394.25, allowing San 
Francisco to aggregate the electrical load of electricity consumers within San Francisco and to 
accelerate the introduction of renewable energy, conservation and energy efficiency into San 
Francisco's portfolio of energy resources. 

2/24/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to City Services Committee. 

3/1/04. REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT Referred to Small Business Commission for comment and recommendation 

4/20/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040448 [Accept-Expend Federal Funding - Community Development Block Grant] 
Mayor 

Resolution approving the 2004 Community Development Program; and authorizing the Mayor, on 
behalf of the City and County of San Francisco, to accept and expend the City's 2004 Community 
Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, and Program Income of $31,374,675 which include indirect costs of $150,000, and 
approving expenditure schedules for recipient departments and agencies and for indirect costs. 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee. 
4/19/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee 



040447 [Accept-Expend Federal Funding - HOME Program] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a 
grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a total amount of 
$8,804,425 which include indirect costs of $10,000 for the HOME Program authorized under TITLE 
II of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, Public Law Number 101-625, and approving the 
HOME Program description as described in the 2004 Action Plan for San Francisco's Consolidated 
Plan. 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee. 
4/19/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



City and County of San Francisco 



fruited at 11:1.1 AM on 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, April 28, 2004 



040449 [Federal Funding - Emergency Shelter Grants Program] 
Supervisor Dufty 

Resolution approving the 2004 Emergency Shelter Grants Program and Expenditure Schedule; and 
authorizing the Mayor on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a 
S924.509 entitlement grant under the Emergency Shelter Grants Program from the U.S. Department 
of Housing and Urban Development. 

4/13/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee 
4/19/04. TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee 



10. 040364 [Municipal Transportation Agency Contract No. CS-103 with Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc.] 

Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Municipal Transportation Agency to enter into Amendment No. 4 to 
Municipal Railway Contract No. CS-103 with Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc., for further engineering 
services through closeout of MUNI's Light Rail Replacement Program, for (1) further consulting 
services through closeout of MUNI's light rail vehicle replacement program, (2) a contract increase 
not to exceed $1,500,998. for a total contract amount not to exceed $17,223,352; and (3) a contract 
extension through December 31, 2007. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



11. 040384 [Municipal Transportation Agency Contract Modification No. 12 with ANSALDOBREDA 

S.p.a] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Municipal Transportation Agency to enter into Contract Modification No. 
12 with ANSALDOBREDA S.p.a for (1) completion of the video surveillance retrofit on 87 light rail 
vehicles; (2) design, testing and installation of an emergency brake acceleration limiting device on 
151 vehicles; (3) overhaul of the brake system on 23 vehicles, plus two options for up to 30 additional 
vehicles each; (4) funding for spare parts and repair of damaged vehicles; and (5) modification of the 
delivery schedule, payment schedule, warranty provisions, and other terms and conditions of the 
contract to address the new work; all in an amount not to exceed $9,148,576, and for a total contract 
amount not to exceed $407,155,455. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:33 AM on 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Agenda 



Wednesday, April 28, 2004 



12. 040362 [To appropriate funding to Modification No.12 to Contract No.309 with ANSALDOBREDA 

(Breda),and related consultant and administrative costs for the Municipal Transportation 
Agency] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $12,275,000 of fund balance to fund Modification No. 12 to Contract No. 
309 with ANSALDOBREDA (Breda) and for related consultant and administrative costs as part of 
the Muni Light Rail Vehicles (LRV) Procurement Program. Funding is provided from proceeds of a 
recently completed Breda lease-lease back transaction. The MTA adopted Resolution No. 04-016 
approving a spending plan for Muni's Breda LRV modification program, with an emphasis on 
operational and passenger safety security enhancements for fiscal year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 



13. 040343 [Taxi Legislation] 

Supervisors Daly, Ma 

Ordinance amending Sections 1076, 1081, 1121, and 1148.1 of the Police Code to state a test, 
measured in cumulative hours per year, for satisfying the driving requirement imposed on taxicab and 
ramped taxi permitholders; to authorize modification of that cumulative hours test to accommodate 
disabled permitholders; to increase the number of years of driving required of permit applicants to 
qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; to require that the City provide notice to permit applicants 
and taxi drivers of the driving required to qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; and to require 
color scheme permitholders to post a similar notice and maintain records of the driving performed by 
drivers affiliated with the color scheme. 

3/16/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Executive Director, Taxi Commission: Supervisor 
Daly; Carl MacMurdo; Robert Cesana; Jim Nakamura. Mark Gruberg; Jim Kennedy; Hansu Kim; Desta; Supervisor Peskin. 
Continued to April 28, 2004. 



14. 040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in 
classifications 1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant, 2998 
Representative, Commission on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 
Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior 
Energy Specialist, 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain (Fire Department) and 60 promotive provisional 
appointments in classifications 0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager 
IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII, and 0943 Manager VIII. (Human 
Resources Department) 

3/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/31/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Deputy Director, Human Resources Department; 

Supervisor Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey Rose. Budget Analyst; David Novogrodsky, Local 21 ; Richard Rothman; 

Cindy, Local 790. 

Continued to April 1 4, 2004. 

4/14/04. DIVIDED. Heard in Committee. Speakers Marsha Stroope. Human Resources; Supervisor Daly. Harvey Rose, 

Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington. Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes; See File 040491. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED AS DIVIDED. Continued to April 21, 2004. 

4/21/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee Speakers: Supervisor Daly, Marsha Stroope. Human Resources Department; 

Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supervisor Peskin; Katie Pctrucione. M.isor s 

Office; Monique Zmuda, Controller's Office 

Continued to April 28. 2004. 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:33 AM on 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 28, 2004 

15. 040491 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30. 2005 of 42 entrance provisional appointments in 
classifications 0922 Manager I. 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 
Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, and 0943 Manager VIII. 

4/14/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee 

4/14/04. CONTINUED AS DIVIDED Heard in Committee Speakers Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supervisor Daly. 

Harvey Rose. Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington. Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes from File 040239 

Continued to April 21, 2004. 

4/21/04. CONTINUED Heard in Committee. Speakers; Supervisor Daly; Marsha Stroope. Human Resources Department. 

Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza, Airport. Supervisor Peskin. Katie Petrucione. Mayor's 

Office; Monique Zmuda. Controller's Office 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

ADJOURNMENT 



IMPORTANT INFORMATION 

NOTE: Persons unable to attend the meeting may submit to the City, by the time the proceedings 
begin, written comments regarding the agenda items above. These comments will be made a pan of 
the official public record and shall be brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors. Any 
written comments should be sent to: Committee Clerk of the Finance and Audits Committee, San 
Francisco Board of Supenisors, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 
94102 by 5:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Comments which cannot be delivered to the 
committee clerk by that time may be taken directly to the hearing at the location above 



NOTE: 

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65009, the following notice is hereby given: if you challenge, 
in court, the general plan amendments or planning code and zoning map amendments described 
above, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public 
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Board of Supen'isors 
at, or prior to, the public hearing. 



LEGISLATION UNDER THE 30-DAY RULE 



(Not to be considered at this meeting) 

Rule 5.40 provides that when an ordinance or resolution is introduced which would CREATE OR 
REVISE MAJOR CITY POLICY, the committee to which the legislation is assigned shall not consider 
the legislation until at least thirty days after the date of introduction. The provisions of this rule shall 
not apply to the routine operations of the departments of the City or when a legal time limit controls 
the hearing timing. In general, the rule shall not apply to hearings to consider subject matter when 
no legislation has been presented, nor shall the rule apply to resolutions which simply URGE action 
to be taken. 



City and County of San Francisco 6 Printed at 11:33 AM on 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 28, 2004 

Meeting Procedures 

The Board of Supervisors is the Legislative Body of the City and County of San Francisco. The Board has 

several standing Committees where ordinances and resolutions are the subject of hearings at which members of 

the public are urged to testify. The full Board does not hold a second public hearing on measures which have 

been heard in committee. 

Board procedures do not permit: 1) persons in the audience at a Committee meeting to vocally express support 

or opposition to statements by Supervisors or by other persons testifying; 2) ringing and use of cell phones, 

pagers, and similar sound-producing electronic devices; 3) signs to be brought into the meeting or displayed in 

the room; 4) standing in the meeting room. 

Citizens are encouraged to testify at Committee meetings and to write letters to the Clerk of a Committee or to 

its members, City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102. 

Agenda are available on the internet at www.sfgov.org/bdsupvrs.bos.htm. 

THE AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL, ROOM 244, RECEPTION 

DESK. 

Board meetings are cablecast on SF Cable 26. For video tape copies and scheduling call (415) 557-4293. 

Requests for language translation at a meeting must be received no later than noon the Friday before the 

meeting. Contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554-7704. 

AVISO EN ESPANOL: La solicitud para un traductor en una reunion debe recibirse antes de mediodia de el 

viernes anterior a la reunion. Llame a Erasmo Vazquez (415) 554-4909. 

mm &%ft#&RWJ>isi-A/m&itig$ 

SjfTg (415) 554-7701 



Disability Access 

Both the Committee Room (Room 263) and the Legislative Chamber are wheelchair accessible. The closest 

accessible BART Station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this 

location are: #47 Van Ness, and the #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro 

stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, 

call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking in the vicinity of City Hall at Civic Center Plaza and adjacent to Davies Hall and the 

War Memorial Complex. 

All meetings are real-time captioned and are cablecast open-captioned on SF Cable 26. 

The following services are available when requested 48 hours before the Committee meeting. This advance 

notice will help ensure availability. 

• For American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting, contact Ohn Myint at (415) 554- 
7704. 

• For a large print copy of agenda or minutes in alternative formats, contact Annette Lonich at (415) 554-7706. 

• Assistive listening devices are available from the receptionist in the Clerk of the Board's Office. Room 244. 
prior to the meeting. 

■ The Clerk of the Board's Office TTY number is (415) 554-5227. 

In order to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or 
related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various 
chemical based products. 



City and County of San Francisco 7 Printed at 11:33 AM M 4/22/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Agenda Wednesday, April 28, 2004 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, 
councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. The Sunshine 
Ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the 
people's review. For information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco 
Administrative Code) or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Donna Hall; by mail to Sunshine 
Ordinance Task Force. 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244. San Francisco CA 94102 by phone at (415) 
554-7724, by fax at (415) 554-7854 or by email at Donna.Hall@sfgov.org 

Citizens may obtain a free copy of the Sunshine Ordinance by contacting Ms. Hall or by printing Chapter 67 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code on the Internet, at http://www.sfgov.org/sunshine.htm 

Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements 

Individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be 
required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance [SF Campaign & Governmental Conduct Code Sec. 2.100] to 
register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact the 
San Francisco Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102; telephone 
(415) 581-2300; fax (415) 581-2317; web site www.sfgov.org/ethics 



City and County of San Francisco 8 Printed at 11:33 AM on 4/22/04 




City and County of San Francisco 

Meeting Minutes 

Finance and Audits Committee 

Members: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano 
Clerk: Mary Red 



City Hall 

1 Dr. Carlton B. 

Goodlett Place 

San Francisco, CA 

94102-4689 



Wednesday, April 28, 2004 



1:00 PM 
Regular Meeting 



City Hall, Room 263 



st 



Members Present: Chris Daly, Aaron Peskin, Tom Ammiano. 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAY - 6 2004 



SAN l-HANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Meeting Convened 

Meeting convened at 1:05 p.m. 

REGULAR AGENDA 



[All Committees] 

Government Document Section 

Main Library 



031839 [Sidewalk Parking Fine Increase] 
Supervisor Daly 

Ordinance amending Article 7, Section 132 of the San Francisco Traffic Code, to increase the fine for sidewalk 
parking from $75.00 to $100.00 as of January 1, 2004, in accordance with Resolution No. 648-01, adopted 
August 17, 2001; to update the fine for stopping on a freeway because of the repeal of Vehicle Code Section 
25220 and enactment of Vehicle Code Section 21718; and to make various editorial changes to clarify the 
Penalty Schedule. (Parking and Traffic Department) 

(No Public Benefit Recipient.) 

1 1/13/03, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

1 1/17/03, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT. Referred to Planning Department for environmental review. 

12/2/03. RESPONSE RECEIVED. Statutorily exempt from Environmental Review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15273, Rates, Tolls, Fares 

and Charges. 

4/14/04. CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Cheryl Adams, Deputy City Attorney; Harvey Rose. Budget 

Analyst; Denis Mosgofian; Chris Buck; Allan Chalmers; Manish Champsee; Norman Rolfe; Greg Castillo; Tys Sniffen; Peggy DaSilva; 

Jeremy Nelson; Supervisor Peskin; Diana Hammons. Department of Parking and Traffic; Julia Dawson, Department of Parking and 

Traffic. 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

Supervisor Daly requests to be added as sponsor. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Greg Castillo: Peggy da Silva, Walk San Francisco: Bruce Livingston. 
Senior Action Network: Denis Mosgofian; Allan Chalmers: Bob Planthold; Jeremy Nelson; Ian Berke; 
Supervisor Peskin; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney. 

Amend date on page 1, line 4 and page 7, line 14 change "January 1, 2004" to "July 1, 20O4". new talc. 
AMENDED. 

Ordinance amending Article 7, Section 132 of the San Francisco Traffic Code, to increase the fine for sidewalk 
parking from $75.00 to $100.00 as of July 1, 2004, tn accordance with Resolution No. 648-01, adopted August 
17, 2001 ; to update the fine for stopping on a freeway because of the repeal of Vehicle Code Section 25220 
and enactment of Vehicle Code Section 21718; and to make various editorial changes to clarify the Penalty 
Schedule. (Parking and Traffic Department) 
RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



1 



Printed at 11:49 ; \\t on S/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040061 [DPT Management and Accounting Controls] 
Supervisor Ma 

Hearing to review the Department of Parking and Traffic's management and accounting controls over the City's 

parking ticket division, including but not limited to, the procedures in place to avoid ticket fixing. 

1/13/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Ma; Gerald Norman, Director, Department of Parking and 

Traffic; Supervisor Ammiano. 

FILED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040329 [Conditional approval of an historical property contract for 690 Market Street - The Chronicle Building] 
Supervisor Peskin 

Resolution under Chapter 71 of the San Francisco Administrative Code, conditionally approving an historical 
property contract between 690 HTC LLC and 690B LLC, the owners of conditional landmark No. 243 at 690 
Market Street and the City and County of San Francisco, conditionally authorizing the Director of Planning and 
the Assessor to execute the historical property contract. 
3/16/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 
Continued to May 12, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040454 [General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004-RI] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the issuance from time to time in one or more series of not to exceed $800,000,000 
Aggregate Principal Amount of City and County of San Francisco General Obligation Refunding Bonds; 
approving the form and authorizing the execution of General Obligation Refunding Bonds; approving the form 
and authorizing the execution of Declarations of Trust; authorizing the appointment of depositories and other 
agents; approving the form and authorizing the execution and delivery of Escrow Agreements; approving the 
tax levy for repayment of the General Obligation Refunding Bonds; approving procedures for the sale and 
award of General Obligation Refunding Bonds; approving the form of Official Notices of Sale; authorizing the 
publication of Notices of Intention to Sell; approving the form of and authorizing the execution and delivery of 
Bond Purchase Agreements; approving the form and authorizing the execution and delivery of Continuing 
Disclosure Certificates; authorizing selection of underwriters; approving the form of and authorizing the 
distribution of Preliminary Official Statements and authorizing execution and delivery of Official Statements; 
approving the appointment of verification agents; approving the retention of other agents and payment of 
compensation to such agents; authorizing payment of costs of issuance; approving modifications to documents; 
ratifying actions previously taken; and granting general authority to City officials to take necessary actions in 
connection with the authorization, issuance, sale and delivery of said General Obligation Refunding Bonds and 
the refunding of certain outstanding General Obligation Bonds. 
4/13/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Karen Ribble, Mayor's Office of Finance; Han'ey Rose, Budget Analyst; 

Supervisor Ammiano. 

Amendment of the Whole 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING SAME TITLE. 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:49 AM on 5/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040455 [Refunding Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco Lease Revenue Bonds, 
Series 1994, (George R. Moscone Convention Center)] 
Mayor 

Resolution approving the issuance and sale of lease revenue refunding bonds to refinance lease revenue bonds 
previously issued and sold by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (the 
"Agency"); authorizing the release of reserved monies; approving the form of a project lease between the 
Agency and the City and County of San Francisco (including certain indemnities contained therein); approving 
the form of the official statement in preliminary and final form; approving the form of the continuing disclosure 
certificate; approving the form of irrevocable refunding instructions; and, ratifying previous actions taken in 
connection therewith. 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 
Heard in Committee. Speakers: Nadia Sesay, Mayor's Office of Finance. 
Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution approving the issuance and sale of lease revenue refunding bonds to refinance lease revenue bonds 
previously issued and sold by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco (the 
"Agency"); authorizing the release of reserved monies; approving the form of a project lease between the 
Agency and the City and County of San Francisco (including certain indemnities contained therein); approving 
the form of the official statement in preliminary and final form; approving the form of the continuing disclosure 
certificate; approving the form of irrevocable refunding instructions; and, ratifying previous actions taken in 
connection therewith; continuing to reserve $2,140,000. 
RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040236 [Community Choice Aggregation Program] 

Supervisors Ammiano, Maxwell, Gonzalez, Peskin, Daly 

Ordinance establishing a Community Choice Aggregation Program in accordance with California Public 
Utilities Code Sections 218.3, 331.1, 366, 366.2, 381.1, 394, and 394.25, allowing San Francisco to aggregate 
the electrical load of electricity consumers within San Francisco and to accelerate the introduction of renewable 
energy, conservation and energy efficiency into San Francisco's portfolio of energy resources. 
2/24/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to City Services Committee. 

3/1/04, REFERRED TO DEPARTMENT. Referred to Small Business Commission for comment and recommendation. 
4/20/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Ammiano: Ed Smeloff, Assistant General Manager, Public 
Utilities Commission; Jared Bloomfeild; Barbara George, Women's Energy Matters; Paul Fenn; Greenwood 
Earth Alliance; Daniel Kammen; Lynda Arakelian, Greenpeace. 
Supervisors Peskin and Daly requested to be added as co-sponsors. 
RECOMMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:49AM on 5/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040448 [Accept-Expend Federal Funding - Community Development Block Grant] 
Mayor 

Resolution approving the 2004 Community Development Program; and authorizing the Mayor, on behalf of 
the City and County of San Francisco, to accept and expend the City's 2004 Community Development Block 
Grant (CDBG) entitlement from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Program 
Income of S3 1,374,675 which include indirect costs of $150,000, and approving expenditure schedules for 
recipient departments and agencies and for indirect costs. 
4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee. 
4/19/04. TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Dwayne Jones, Director, Mayor's Office of Community Development; Rene 
Casanovi; Supervisor Daly; Daryl Higashi, Director, Mayor's Office of Housing; Harvey Rose, Budget 
Analyst; Joseph Smooke, Bemal Heights Neighborhood Center; Male speaker; London Breed, Director, 
African American Art & Culture Center; Supervisor Ammiano; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney. 
Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution approving the 2004 Community Development Program; and authorizing the Mayor, on behalf of 
the City and County of San Francisco, to accept and expend the City's 2004 Community Development Block 
Grant (CDBG) entitlement from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Program 
Income of $31,374,675 which include indirect costs of $150,000, and approving expenditure schedules for 
recipient departments and agencies and for indirect costs; placing $2,372,271 on reserve. 
RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040447 [Accept-Expend Federal Funding - HOME Program] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a grant from 
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a total amount of $8,804,425 which 
include indirect costs of $10,000 for the HOME Program authorized under TITLE II of the National 
Affordable Housing Act of 1990, Public Law Number 101-625, and approving the HOME Program description 
as described in the 2004 Action Plan for San Francisco's Consolidated Plan. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

4/13/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee. 

4/19/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Dwayne Jones, Director, Mayor's Office of Community Development; Rene 

Casanovi; Supervisor Daly; Daryl Higashi, Director, Mayor's Office of Housing; Harvey Rose, Budget 

Analyst; Joseph Smooke, Bemal Heights Neighborhood, Center; Male speaker; London Breed, Director, 

African American Art & Culture Center; Supen'isor Ammiano; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution authorizing the Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a grant from 

the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a total amount of $8,804,425 for the 

HOME Program authorized under TITLE II of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, Public Law 

Number 101-625, and approving the HOME Program description as described in the 2004 Action Plan for San 

Francisco's Consolidated Plan; and placing $82,718 on reserve. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:49 AM on 5/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040449 [Federal Funding - Emergency Shelter Grants Program] 
Supervisor Dufry 

Resolution approving the 2004 Emergency Shelter Grants Program and Expenditure Schedule; and authorizing 
the Mayor on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a $924,509 entitlement 
grant under the Emergency Shelter Grants Program from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

4/1 3/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Land Use Committee. 

4/1 9/04, TRANSFERRED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Dwayne Jones, Director, Mayor's Office of Community Development; Rene 

Casanovi; Supervisor Daly; Daryl Higashi, Director, Mayor's Office of Housing; Harvey Rose, Budget 

Analyst; Joseph Smooke, Bernal Heights Neighborhood, Center; Male speaker; London Breed, Director, 

African American Art & Culture Center; Supervisor Ammiano; Ted Lakey, Deputy City Attorney. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution approving the 2004 Emergency Shelter Grants Program and Expenditure Schedule; and authorizing 

the Mayor on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco to accept and expend a $924,509 entitlement 

grant under the Emergency Shelter Grants Program from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development; placing $96,1 15 on reserve. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040364 [Municipal Transportation Agency Contract No. CS-103 with Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc.] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Municipal Transportation Agency to enter into Amendment No. 4 to Municipal 
Railway Contract No. CS-103 with Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc., for further engineering services through 
closeout of MUNFs Light Rail Replacement Program, for (1) further consulting services through closeout of 
MUNFs light rail vehicle replacement program, (2) a contract increase not to exceed $1,500,998, for a total 
contract amount not to exceed $17,223,352; and (3) a contract extension through December 31, 2007. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Ann Carey, Financial Manager, MUNI; Har\>ey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Resolution authorizing the Municipal Transportation Agency to enter into Amendment No. 4 to Municipal 

Railway Contract No. CS-103 with Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc., for further engineering services through 

closeout of MUNI's Light Rail Replacement Program, for ( 1 ) further consulting services through closeout of 

MUNI's light rail vehicle replacement program, (2) a contract increase not to exceed $1,500,978, for a total 

contract amount not to exceed $17,223,332; and (3) a contract extension through December 31, 2007. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

4/28/04, Amendment of the Whole. 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 1 1 :49 AM on 5H/0-I 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040384 [Municipal Transportation Agency Contract Modification No. 12 with ANSALDOBREDA S.p.a] 
Mayor 

Resolution authorizing the Municipal Transportation Agency to enter into Contract Modification No. 12 with 
ANSALDOBREDA S.p.a for (1) completion of the video surveillance retrofit on 87 light rail vehicles; (2) 
design, testing and installation of an emergency brake acceleration limiting device on 151 vehicles; (3) 
overhaul of the brake system on 23 vehicles, plus two options for up to 30 additional vehicles each; (4) funding 
for spare parts and repair of damaged vehicles; and (5) modification of the delivery schedule, payment 
schedule, warranty provisions, and other terms and conditions of the contract to address the new work; all in an 
amount not to exceed $9,148,576, and for a total contract amount not to exceed $407,155,455. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Ann Carey, Financial Manager, MUNI; Har\'ey Rose, Budget Analyst. 
Amended on page 3, line 17 to reduce the amount from $12,275,000 to $12,274,340; same title. 
AMENDED. 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040362 [To appropriate funding to Modification No.12 to Contract No.309 with ANSALDOBREDA 

(Breda),and related consultant and administrative costs for the Municipal Transportation Agency] 
Mayor 

Ordinance appropriating $12,275,000 of fund balance to fund Modification No. 12 to Contract No. 309 with 
ANSALDOBREDA (Breda) and for related consultant and administrative costs as part of the Muni Light Rail 
Vehicles (LRV) Procurement Program. Funding is provided from proceeds of a recently completed Breda 
lease-lease back transaction. The MTA adopted Resolution No. 04-016 approving a spending plan for Muni's 
Breda LRV modification program, with an emphasis on operational and passenger safety security 
enhancements for fiscal year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

3/23/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Ann Carey, Financial Manager, MUNI; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst. 

Amendment of the Whole. 

AMENDED, AN AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE BEARING NEW TITLE. 

Ordinance appropriating $12,274,340 of fund balance to fund Modification No. 12 to Contract No. 309 with 

ANSALDOBREDA (Breda) and for related consultant and administrative costs as part of the Muni Light Rail 

Vehicles (LRV) Procurement Program. Funding is provided from proceeds of a recently completed Breda 

lease-lease back transaction. The MTA adopted Resolution No. 04-016 approving a spending plan for Muni's 

Breda LRV modification program, with an emphasis on operational and passenger safety security 

enhancements for fiscal year 2003-04. 

(Fiscal impact.) 

RECOMMENDED AS AMENDED by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 11:49 AM on 5/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee 



Meeting Minutes 



April 28, 2004 



040343 [Taxi Legislation] 

Supervisors Daly, Ma 

Ordinance amending Sections 1076, 1081, 1121, and 1148.1 of the Police Code to state a test, measured in 
cumulative hours per year, for satisfying the driving requirement imposed on taxicab and ramped taxi 
permitholders; to authorize modification of that cumulative hours test to accommodate disabled permitholders; 
to increase the number of years of driving required of permit applicants to qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi 
permit; to require that the City provide notice to permit applicants and taxi drivers of the driving required to 
qualify for a taxicab or ramped taxi permit; and to require color scheme permitholders to post a similar notice 
and maintain records of the driving performed by drivers affiliated with the color scheme. 
3/16/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Executive Director, Taxi Commission; Supervisor Daly; Carl 
MacMurdo; Robert Cesana; Jim Nakamura; Mark Gruberg; Jim Kennedy; Hansu Kim; Desta; Supervisor Peskin. 
Continued to April 28, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Naomi Little, Taxi Commission; Tom Owens, Deputy City Attorney; Cheryl 
Adams, Deputy City Attorney; Carl Macmurdo; Robert Cesana; Jim Gullespie; Joseph Fleischman; Barry 
Taranto; Ruach Graffis; Marlia Smith; Jim Kennedy; Jim Nakamura; Supervisor Daly; Monique Zmuda, 
Controller's Office. 
Continued to May 19, 2004. 
CONTINUED by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



040239 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of provisional appointments of employees in classifications 

1237 Training Coordinator, 1410 Chief Clerk, 1842 Management Assistant, 2998 Representative, Commission 

on Status of Women, 3280 Assistant Recreation Director, 3284 Recreation Director, 4321 Cashier 2, 5278 

Planner 2, 5283 Planner 5, 5293 Planner 4, 5608 Senior Energy Specialist, 9343 Roofer, and H-30 Captain 

(Fire Department) and 60 promotive provisional appointments in classifications 0922 Manager I, 0923 

Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 0942 Manager VII, and 

0943 Manager VIII. (Human Resources Department) 

3/5/04, RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

3/31/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Deputy Director. Human Resources Department. Supervisor 

Daly; Supervisor Ammiano; Harvey Rose, Budget Analyst; David Novogrodsky, Local 21; Richard Rothman; Cindy. Local 790. 

Continued to Apnl 14, 2004. 

4/14/04, DIVIDED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supervisor Daly; Harvey Rose. Budget 

Analyst; Ed Harrington, Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes; See File 040491 . 

4/14/04, CONTINUED AS DIVIDED. Continued to April 21, 2004. 

4/21/04, CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Marsha Stroope, Human Resources Department: Harvey Rose, 

Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza, Airport; Supervisor Peskin; Katie Petrucione, Mayor's Office; Monique Zmuda, 

Controller's Office. 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Amelda, Local 21; Supen'isor Daly; Monique Zmuda. Controller's Office. 
REFERRED to the Budget Committee by the following vote: 

Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



City and County of San Francisco 



Printed at 1 1 :49 AM on 5/4/04 



Finance and Audits Committee Meeting Minutes April 28, 2004 



040491 [Extending provisional appointments] 

Resolution approving extension to June 30, 2005 of 42 entrance provisional appointments in classifications 

0922 Manager I, 0923 Manager II, 0931 Manager III, 0932 Manager IV, 0933 Manager V, 0941 Manager VI, 

and 0943 Manager VHJ. 

4/14/04. RECEIVED AND ASSIGNED to Finance and Audits Committee. 

4/14/04, CONTINUED AS DIVIDED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Marsha Stroope, Human Resources; Supervisor Daly; Harvey 

Rose, Budget Analyst; Ed Harrington, Controller. 

Divided 42 management classes from File 040239. 

Continued to April 21, 2004. 

4/21/04. CONTINUED. Heard in Committee. Speakers: Supervisor Daly; Marsha Stroope, Human Resources Department. Harvey Rose, 

Budget Analyst; Supervisor Ammiano; Peter Nardoza. Airport; Supervisor Peskin; Katie Petrucione, Mayor's Office; Monique Zmuda, 

Controllers Office. 

Continued to April 28, 2004. 

Heard in Committee. Speakers: Amelda, Local 21; Supen'isor Daly; Monique Zmuda, Controller's Office. 
REFERRED to the Budget Committee by the following vote: 
Ayes: 3 - Daly, Peskin, Ammiano 



ADJOURNMENT 

The meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m. 



23*621 



Cily and County of San Francisco 8 Printed at 11:49 AM on 5/4/04 



. HOUCHEN * 

* BINDERY LTD * 

* UTICA.OMAHA NE. ^ 

* 2004